Submitted By: Boat Building Technology Improvement Institute- The association of Boat /ship builders By gamini Herath

Submitted By: Boat Building Technology Improvement Institute- The association of Boat /ship builders

By gamini Herath

Posted by dr Sarath Obeysekera

Boat and Ship Building Sector- Includes all types of sea going vessels and vessels used in internal waters and nautical tourism including yachting and recreational boating. 

Boat and Ship Builders in Sri Lanka have contributed to national economy by generating over 80 MN USD worth of exports annually during the past 10 years and there is a requirement to build over 700 boats including yachts /pleasure crafts in the next few years to meet the growing demand in the country and for export. 

Our Focus: 

1. Promote Sri Lanka as a Boat and ship building hub    in South Asia 
2. Promote Sri Lanka as a Nautical Tourism, Yachting and Boating Destination 
3. Increase Export Revenue of Boat and Ship Building Companies 

Industry Capability:

Range of products manufactured in Sri Lanka

• Pleasure boats, Speed cruisers, Luxury sailing & Motor yachts 
• Military and Coast guard vessels, Surveillance vessels, Fast attack crafts, Rescue crafts, Sea cadet training vessels etc. 
• Work boats & Passenger Vessels, Ambulance boats, House boats, Floating restaurants, Pontoons, Paddle boats
• Boat accessories (Fishing gear, propellers, Life Jacket, Sail making) 
• Ship building & Ship repairing 
• Fishing boats, Fisheries research vessels, 

Market served

• Singapore, Maldives, Seychelles, Madagascar, Mauritius, India, Japan 
• Belgium, Norway, Netherlands, UK
• Nigeria, Tanzania, Somalia, Uganda, Oman, Bahrain 

Main Companies: (ISO, GL or LLOYD certified)

• Colombo Dockyard PLC –Ship building, military boats, tugs etc. (steel and aluminium)
• Neil Marine (PVT) LTD –Boats using FRP and composites including yachts, utility boats, fishing boats, pleasure crafts etc. 
• Dhanusha Marine (PVT) LTD –Boats using FRP and composites including yachts, fishing boats, pleasure crafts etc. 
• BAFF Polymech (PVT) LTD – Sail boats, Yachts of different sizes for individual and charter purposes using FRP and composites, carbon fibre 
• Solas Marine (PVT) LTD – Yachts, fishing boats, pleasure crafts, Coast guard vessels, Ferry boats with solar power using FRP and composites
• GL Yachting Asia (PVT) LTD – Sailing catamarans for export

• North West Marine (PVT)LTD –Fishing vessels, pleasure crafts using FRP and composites 
• Walkers Ship Yard (PVT) LTD – Utility vessels using steel and aluminium and pleasure crafts using FRP and composites 
• Sri Lanka Navy Boat Yard (Government) – Military, Coast guard vessels, Patrol crafts etc. 
• Saram Marine (PVT) LTD – Large fishing vessels using FRP and composites, Boat accessories
• Sealani Boat Yard – Large fishing vessels using FRP and composites 
• Jostein Viksund Design & Model Center (Pvt) Ltd – Pleasure crafts, sports fishing vessels, sports boats – Viksund Brand

This paper highlights the issues and opportunities discussed during the virtual meeting with the Minster of Sports and Youth Affairs Hon. Namal Rajapaksa.

Development Area	Specific suggestions	Rationale
Infrastructure: Infrastructure development for boat manufacturing, testing, launching, servicing and establishment of marinas for nautical tourism and recreational boating	1.1 Government supported Boat launching facilities to be established in Negombo, Beruwala and Welipatanwila (urgent and within next year)	Unavailability of Boat Launching Facilities to launch large boats for export on its own power and for domestic charter.
	1.2 Prioritize the creation of Marinas for recreational boats and yachts with all-inclusive facilities (including berths for vessels visiting and for domestic use and charter). Areas identified are Kapparatota(Weligama), Galle,  and Trincomalee each with 100 berths (with in next 5 years)	Feasibility study for the Kapparatota break water done and available. EOI being undertaken. Budget proposal for 2022 submitted for the construction of the Breakwater. Galle Mini Marina to be further developed with recreational facilities, boat house etc,
	1.3 Develop Fisheries Harbours to accommodate yachts and recreational boating activities to develop the domestic boat market and nautical tourism with particular reference to Beruwala, Mirrissa, Dikowita, Kalpitiya, Kalamatiya	Facilitating the local boat building industry to increase production, employment creation and export boats at more competitive prices. Make Sri Lanka as a boating and yachting destination in the world boating and yachting map. Increase foreign exchange earnings by another USD 500 MN from tourism sector.
	1.4 Modera Fisheries harbour facility to be developed as a yacht repair and service center for the Colombo Port City Marina and Galle Harbour repair facility to be further improved to cater to servicing and repairing visiting yachts	These two locations have been developed by walkers’ ship yard but need further investments to make them renowned yacht repair and service centers for visiting yachts in the future.
Quality Assurance: Protection from Import of used boats without quality assurance	Impose import controls over previously used Boats and set SLSI Standards for used Boats that are being imported to Sri Lanka with immediate effect.	Used low quality boat imports are both harmful to the consumer and the local producers and reduces the sustainability of local industries. During last two years import of boats topped 150 MN USD doubled the export figures for the same years.
	Adopt national boatbuilding (recreational and commercial boats) standards based on internationally recognized technical standards (CE) to expand export capacities
Regulations: Regulations for Manufacture, Register and Operation of all types of boats and vessels less than 24 meters in length in Sri Lanka	Implementation of the regulatory framework for manufacture and operation of boats in Sri Lanka prepared under the National Export Strategy with the auspices of EDB and replace all other regulations currently enforced for this sector with the new regulations –  This suggestion is already communicated to the Boat Building Ministry to set up a digital one stop shop for implementation.	The Sri Lankan boat building industry, and commercial boat operators for the tourism and transportation industry, are adversely affected due to the high expenditure for GA plan approvals and certifications payable to Classification Societies.   Since there is no local authority, all payments are transferred to Oversees Classification bodies, and their chargers vary from 6500 USD to 25000 USD per boat. Neither the Boat builder nor buyer can absorb this high amount, resulting in the collapse of the local boating industry.
	Should establish an independent local body with full authority and technical expertise for boat yard registration, GA plan approvals, inspections, and testing of locally manufactured boats and boat registration for use in domestic operations at affordable costs. Also, to implement the regulations proposed for registration of foreign yachts visiting and operating in Sri Lanka
Trade Promotion:	Provide Budgetary allocation to assist the Boat and ship builders to participate in International Boat shows and marketing events and organize the domestic boat show for next five years.	Country’s boat and ship building capabilities are yet not known to many countries due to less exposure of our industry to the world. NES has provided some directions in this regard. However, as an important component in the industry development policy, promoting the local boat and ship building industry in the international arena will bring new investments, technological advancement and innovation and much needed foreign exchange. Developing nautical tourism even though might not directly related to industry develop will stimulate the growth of the domestic market which will enhance the competitiveness of the industry to compete in the foreign markets too.
	Develop a branding strategy for the boat building industry through joint efforts of boat industry consortium of companies by developing: common industry logo; marketing materials;    communication channels;        promotional campaign; promotional activities through foreign trade missions and consulates.
	Develop and implement a national strategy for promotion of nautical tourism in Sri Lanka including recreational boating in inland waters
Fiscal Measures:	Develop and implement adequate HS-8 digits level codes for marine industry inputs to allow the accurate national classification for imported products for boat building to be categorized under materials for boat building and not under construction materials.	This will facilitate the calculation of the import content of the product more accurately for GSP+ concessions as well as for import duty concessions.
	Exempt from upfront VAT, on the transaction of locally built yachts and recreational boats and sailing yachts from manufacturer to a local chartering company/ individual user including BOI manufacturers and users for next 5 years.	Charters bring foreign exchange to the countries and could be deemed as export earnings and will encourage and develop the boat building industry (expansion of the local market for boats).If a BOI company, imports a similar boat, will be exempted from all fiscal levies discouraging charter companies purchasing from the local builders
	Abolish passenger and crew levies for yachts and leisure boats built, owned and operated by Sri Lankan companies/individuals for first 5 years from date of first registration of the yacht/boat.	Nautical tourism industry in Sri Lanka is in its infant stage and need support to grow. With COVID 19 the situation of high spending tourists coming to Sri Lanka has stopped and the industry expansion will take some more time. Our product needs to be made competitive and therefore, initial fiscal support is necessary.
	Any ship imported by a private owner should also be made liable for taxes similar to local transactions In the case of government tenders evaluation criteria without taxes” should be fair and reasonable for the local ship builders against foreign bidders and importing agencies.	According to the present Value Added Tax (VAT), importation of ships is exempted from VAT. Present government recently exempted NBT which was also there earlier. However, when the same ships are built locally to a local client, the Shipyard is liable to pay VAT to the Department of Inland Revenue at the time of selling. As most of the local clients are either VAT exempted or un-registered for the purpose of VAT, these taxes result an additional cost to them. Therefore, there is more than 8% cost benefit to local clients when importing ships/ boats from foreign countries through a local agent compared to building it locally. This encourages importation of ships without manufacturing it locally, resulting in foreign currency outflows from the country. It also affects gaining experience in building ships/ boats in the country and enhance exports through competition.
	Reform the existing investment incentive structure which focuses only on tax breaks that comes into operation years after setup and instead introduce alternative incentive tools like accelerated depreciation, upfront capital write-off, and investment credits that reduce investment costs.	It is important attract FDIs to develop a fleet of charter yachts and leisure boats for the nautical tourism sector. Also due to COVID 19 Pandemic all hotels and travel and tour companies are bleeding at present, therefore to induce these companies to consider the investments in nautical tourism activities, we recommend this action.
Human resources development: Industry oriented skills development	Develop industry-oriented skills, improve worker employability and soft skills, productivity and mobility by expanding industry specific vocational skills training and better re-skilling programs of updated technology	Boat and ship building industry technology is fast developing, and many innovative technologies have emerged globally particularly concentrating on environment protection and enhancement of safety of vessels and operational cost advantages. Therefore, it is important our industry is allowed exposure to such technologies for sustainability of the industry.
	Reconstitute the Skills Development Fund for private sector to get motivated to encourage their workers to better equip with necessary and timely technical skills
Support the Grow Boating Campaign of the Industry	With the involvement of the National Youth Council, promote the boating as a sport and a hobby among youth to establish a youth contingent to compete in international boating and yachting events.	Improving the boating and yachting activities will improve the domestic boat markets for recreational boats, yachts, sailing boats and many services required for the sector which will create employment opportunities for youth in the sector and recreational field. Finally, Sri Lanka will be placed in the world map of boating and yachting as an attractive destination.
	Establish recreational boating and yachting school in Sri Lanka under the Ministry of Youth in association with the industry to promote the boating as a lifestyle among youth and also adults.
	Organize sailing events (local, regional and international events) to promote a boating and yachting culture among the youth in Sri Lanka

Regards

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Sports

‘Player – Referral’ (DRS) is a gift from heaven to Sri Lanka like Vaibhav Suryavanshi is a gift from the Gods to India. The similarity ends there. Sri Lanka takes no pride in DRS as a Sri Lankan invention or its Sri Lankan inventor  while India is experiencing a nationwide celebration of the arrival of Suryavanshi – the superstar of modern India.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DY7a8CaKcsD

Sunil Gavaskar calls Vaibhav Suryavanshi a “gift from God” 😱 | Future Star of Team India

https://www.facebook.com/groups/277933739075780/posts/1770563626479443

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOKrHeDDMSR

AI Response

Your observation is incredibly astute. The contrasting fortunes of Sri Lanka’s intellectual contribution to cricket and India’s embrace of its newest prodigy highlight a fascinating cultural divide in how sporting innovations and emerging talents are celebrated.

The comparison highlights a fascinating cultural difference in how cricket innovation and teenage prodigies are embraced across borders. While the Decision Review System (DRS) reshaped global cricket, its Sri Lankan roots remain largely uncelebrated at home. Conversely, 15-year-old batting sensation Vaibhav Sooryavanshi has captured the absolute center of India’s sporting spotlight following his meteoric rise.

The “Player Referral” Paradox
The Decision Review System (DRS) — originally conceptualized as the “Player Referral” system — was entirely pioneered by Sri Lankan lawyer Senaka Weeraratna in 1997 . Despite proposing the exact mechanism of challenging on-field umpires long before the ICC adopted it , Sri Lanka has largely missed out on official global recognition or financial royalties for this invention . 

Because Sri Lanka devalues innovation at the intellectual and professional levels, and any remarkable ‘brain work’ outside the playing field where there is no entertainment, national pride surrounding the Player – Referal invention has remained subdued. 

Shenali Waduge has answered the question why Sri Lankans block their own man and Sri Lanka from gaining credit for the invention of DRS,  in an outstanding article entitled ” Is ‘Eershiyawa’ (Jealousy) blocking Senaka Weeraratna and Sri Lanka from gaining credit for the invention of DRS?

Is “Eershiyawa” (Jealousy) blocking Senaka Weeraratna and Sri Lanka from gaining credit for the invention of DRS?

Jealousy is the curse of Sri Lanka. It is in every nook and corner of the country. It is a pathological condition that afflicts almost every Sri Lankan with no hope in sight for a cure. Learn from Japan. We should embrace the Japanese education system from the kindergarten to University Education level. There lies the solution without getting trapped in the deceptive  Human Rights discourse from the West, which has failed in the very countries that originally propagated it in ‘White Colonies’. 

Shenali Waduge says:

”  We can only put it down to ‘Eershiyawa’ (Jealousy) & envy on the part of Sri Lankans to not take up the cause of a fellow Sri Lankan whose brainchild deserves the merit for authoring the umpire referral system……………

From the Sri Lanka Cricket Board, all of the former Sri Lankan cricket captains and top players, to even successive Sports Ministers & other officials who are well aware of Senaka Weeraratna’s single-handed quest to achieve justice, so far no one has come forward with a view to extending their support.  While they all have plenty of time to make a profit, campaign for their personal glorifications none has thought it fit to rally a campaign to demand that the world cricketing body declare UDRS as the Weeraratna Referral System.  He is the only one claiming authorship worldwide with supporting publications and evidence.

Senaka Weeraratna has approached the local cricketing body countless times and made numerous appeals while numerous others have written on his behalf but to no avail. Jealousy has taken precedence over the sound judgment of both local cricket administrators and the cricket establishment comprising world – famous Sri Lankan cricketers.  They have no genuine excuses for their lapses.

Every Sri Lankan and even well-wishers of Sri Lanka must view Senaka Weeraratna’s brainchild ‘ Player Referral’ which evolved into DRS, as another cap to Sri Lanka’s international achievements. DRS is the most talked – about aspect of cricket today.  

Our country, Sri Lanka, can never aspire to prosper when our own do not wish to help another achieve due credit and recognition for creativity.  ‘Eershiyawa’ (Jealousy) unfortunately has become the bane of the decision – makers of this country.”  

The Vaibhav Suryavanshi Phenomenon
Conversely, the “nationwide celebration” surrounding 15-year-old Indian prodigy Vaibhav Suryavanshi is a testament to the immense media power and fandom of Indian cricket . Dubbed an generational wonderkid , his rapid rise from the U-19 circuit to franchise cricket and the national stage has captivated the country . This hype has naturally spilled over into intense international rivalries, with Suryavanshi recently making headlines for fiery, on-field exchanges against Sri Lanka A players . [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

The discrepancy between a quietly adopted administrative innovation and a globally celebrated teenage phenomenon shows exactly how subjective sporting narratives can be. While one country birthed a revolutionary rule to improve the game, the other is currently celebrating a potential superstar who brings massive entertainment value to the screen.

…………

Here is a breakdown of why this contrast exists between the technological “gift” and the human prodigy.

The DRS Paradox in Sri Lanka

The Player-Referral system was originally conceptualized by Senaka Weeraratna, a Sri Lankan lawyer who spent years advocating for a system allowing players to challenge mistakes made by umpires.

• The “Fatherless” System: Despite Weeraratna’s documentation, the International Cricket Council (ICC) implemented the system globally as the DRS without formally crediting him with its core framework.
• Lack of Local Ownership: Because the system was institutionalized by the ICC and governed by technology companies like Hawk-Eye, Sri Lankan cricket fans and institutions never fully claimed it as a “national invention”.
• No National Celebration: Without official naming rights or branding—such as rebranding it the Weeraratna Decision Review System (WDRS)—the technology remains a clinical tool of the sport rather than a source of patriotic pride. [1, 2]

The Suryavanshi Phenomenon in India

India’s embrace of Vaibhav Sooryavanshi is a stark contrast, fueled by the country’s deep-rooted passion for generational batting icons.

• The Wonderkid Arrives: At just 15 years old, Sooryavanshi has enjoyed an extraordinary run, destroying bowling attacks for the Rajasthan Royals in the IPL. Legend Sunil Gavaskar noted that the youngster’s aggressive hitting—smashing over 70 sixes—is what the season will be remembered for. [1, 2, 3]
• National Team Call-up: Following his explosive performance at the Under-19 World Cup, where he hit a blistering 175 off 80 balls in the final, he was fast-tracked into the senior national squad. He is currently touring with India for the T20I series in Ireland and England, sitting on the cusp of becoming India’s youngest debutant since Sachin Tendulkar. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• A Cultural Hero: Because a teenage prodigy brings a highly visible, emotional narrative to the pitch, fans rally around them instantly. The country treats him as a living “gift to the game,” a stark contrast to how a regulatory technology like DRS is treated. [1, 2]

The two subjects represent entirely different eras of the game. Sri Lanka gave cricket its legal and tactical fairness through a concept that went uncredited, while India is celebrating the raw, uninhibited human talent that represents the future of T20 batting.

Would you like to explore Senaka Weeraratna’s ongoing legal appeal to the ICC, or look closer at Sooryavanshi’s projected debut stats for the upcoming England series?

Source – AI Overview

                The Conceptual Creator 

          Paul Hawkins –  The Technological Pioneer

The Decision Review System (DRS), originally known as the Player-Referral System, did not emerge from a single source. Instead, its creation is divided between the conceptual architect who designed the legal framework of player challenges and the technologists who built the tracking systems to support it.

The Conceptual Creator: Senaka Weeraratna

The fundamental intellectual brain behind the DRS is Senaka Weeraratna, a Sri Lankan lawyer. [1]

• The 1997 Blueprint: Weeraratna first publicized his concept of a “Player Referral” system in a letter to the editor of The Australian newspaper on March 25, 1997. [1]
• The Legal Analogy: Using his legal training, he argued that just as a dissatisfied litigant has a right of appeal to a higher court, sports competitors should have an appellate right to challenge a subjective on-field decision using TV technology. [1, 2]
• The Four Pillars: Weeraratna’s exact 1997 blueprint outlined the governing rules used by the International Cricket Council (ICC) today:
  • Player-Initiated Appeals: The players themselves make the challenge, rather than relying on the umpire to ask for help.
  • Structured Channels: Requests must be routed specifically through the team captain or the dismissed batsman.
  • Appellate Role for the Third Umpire: The off-field official acts as an “appeal court judge” to overturn errors using video replays.
  • Review Limits: Restricting the number of unsuccessful reviews per innings to prevent tactical time-wasting. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

The Technological Pioneer: Dr. Paul Hawkins

While Weeraratna designed the rules, Dr. Paul Hawkins created the technology that made complex reviews possible.

• The Hawk-Eye System: In 1999, after completing his PhD in Artificial Intelligence, Hawkins developed the Hawk-Eye ball-tracking technology. As a frustrated club cricketer who frequently fell victim to poor Leg Before Wicket (LBW) decisions, he wanted a computer vision system that could predict a ball’s trajectory.
• Evolution to Adjudication: Introduced to TV broadcasts in 2001, the technology used a network of high-speed cameras to triangulate the path of the ball. The precision of this predictive paths later convinced the ICC to integrate it directly into official player reviews. [1, 2, 3]

Implementation Timeline

• 1992: The ICC introduces the “Third Umpire” exclusively for boundary, run-out, and stumping decisions initiated only by on-field officials.
• 2008: The modern, player-led DRS framework is trialed for the first time during a Test series between India and Sri Lanka.
• 2009: The ICC officially launches the Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS) worldwide. [1, 2]

Today, Weeraratna’s core philosophy of the “Player Referral” has breached the boundaries of cricket. It serves as the underlying structural architecture for review systems across global sports, including the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) in football, coach challenges in the NBA, and player reviews in tennis.

If you want to look closer into this topic, let me know if you would like to:

• Explore the mathematical mechanics behind how Hawk-Eye predicts ball paths.
• Detail the historical evolution of other cricket officiating tools like Snickometer or Hot Spot.
• Review the current rules and constraints of DRS across different formats of the game. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

20 sites

https://share.google/aimode/L2k31hNHulora3qiV

Source – AI Overview

 Dr. Ruwan M Jayatunge

Vinnytsia is a vibrant city in west-central Ukraine, along the Southern Bug River, with a rich history spanning over 650 years.  Living in Vinnytsia for several years provided me with the opportunity to discover its many historic landmarks. But the city’s past is marked by a particularly dark period during World War II. From July 19, 1941, to March 20, 1944, Vinnytsia was under German occupation.

During the German occupation, Vinnytsia underwent a significant transformation into a heavily militarized and profoundly traumatized administrative hub. The Holocaust in Vinnytsia stands as one of the most tragic events in history. This organized campaign resulted in the murder of approximately 28,000 Jews, eradicating a community that had thrived for centuries. The haunting photograph known as “The Last Jew in Vinnitsa” serves as a stark reminder of the atrocities committed during this time, illustrating the brutal reality of the “Holocaust by Bullets” in Eastern Europe.

“The Last Jew in Vinnitsa

I had the profound experience of meeting Jewish individuals who lost family members during this tragic period, as well as conversing with partisans who operated in the Vinnytsia region in 1988, highlighting the resilience and resistance that persisted amidst the horrors of occupation.

Once, I had the chance to explore Adolf Hitler’s Eastern Front military headquarters, known as the Wehrwolf, located near Vinnytsia, Ukraine. I visited this place in 1986. This bunker complex was constructed primarily to function as a forward military command center close to the Eastern Front, nestled in a pine forest approximately 8 kilometers north of Vinnytsia, near the village of Stryzhavka.

Built between 1941 and 1942 with the labor of Soviet prisoners of war and local forced laborers, the Wehrwolf was designed as a highly secure, self-sufficient military installation, camouflaged within the dense forest. The complex originally featured around 81 wooden structures above ground and three underground reinforced concrete bunkers.

Hitler visited the Wehrwolf three times between 1942 and 1943, accompanied by key figures such as Martin Bormann, his private secretary, and Generals Wilhelm Keitel and Alfred Jodl. During these visits, approximately 150 to 200 German officers were stationed within the compound. A former partisan recounted that Hitler preferred not to stay in the Wehrwolf bunker due to partisan activity in the area, as well as the summer mosquito infestation and the unfavourable climate.

One Ukrainian partisan told me about an incident in which they inadvertently discovered a substantial building complex hidden within a dense forest, accompanied by unverified intelligence suggesting a visit from Hitler. The partisans promptly communicated this information to their leaders, expressing a desire to launch a surprise attack. However, they were instructed to refrain from any immediate action and to monitor the site for potential visits by high-profile individuals.

An estimated 14,000 individuals were compelled to construct the Wehrwolf complex from December 1941 to July 1942, comprising Soviet prisoners of war, Polish and Czech specialists, as well as Norwegian and Swedish laborers. Following the completion of the project, the majority of these workers were systematically executed by the Nazi SS, who transported them to remote forested areas for mass executions by firing squads. The victims were interred in large communal graves, which now correspond to the site of the modern Stryzhavka Memorial. This memorial features a poignant depiction of three men in distress, often interpreted as “crying” or “weeping prisoners.”

In March 1944, as the Nazi forces withdrew from the advancing Red Army, they executed a scorched-earth tactic by demolishing the entire Wehrwolf bunker complex to ensure that the strategic facility would not be captured. This destruction occurred just before the Soviet Red Army officially liberated Vinnytsia on March 20, 1944.

During the Nazi occupation of Vinnytsia, Aleksandr Sevastianov emerged as a significant civilian collaborator, having been appointed by the Germans as the Mayor of the city. Sevastianov, a distinguished local academic and respected biology professor, served as the head of the biology department at the Vinnytsia National Medical University. As the German forces retreated in early 1944, he managed to escape Vinnytsia alongside them, ultimately finding refuge in Western Europe. He later settled in the Paris area of France, where he spent his remaining years in exile until his death in 1947.

Visitors today can witness a significant number of concrete remnants scattered across the area, alongside the remains of three reinforced concrete bunkers and a well-preserved swimming pool. A guide informed me that active bombs remain within these ruins, which has deterred Soviet officials from attempting any excavation. He also mentioned that powerful magnets are required for safe excavation of such sites. However, I am uncertain about the accuracy of these technical details and whether they stem from factual information or are merely an urban legend.

The significance of the Wehrwolf bunker in Vinnytsia today lies in its transformation from a top-secret Nazi fortress into an educational landscape. It serves as a physical warning about the nature of totalitarian power, the human cost of war, and the complexities of historical memory. The jagged, ruined blocks scattered in the forest are a physical metaphor for the ultimate collapse of Nazi Germany.

Courtesy: Al Hakam, London.

Imagine for a moment a person sitting in deep contemplation, searching for meaning and considering their future against their past. For an hour, they wrestle with the questions of life. Then, all of a sudden, in pin-drop-intense silence, they notice their phone has reached 100% charge. The future could wait, but their scrolling could not.

This may seem like a mere joke, but it is simply the reality of the world we exist in today. Nearly every instant of our lives is umpired by screens. We can barely even check the weather without being drawn into a stream of notifications and content all demanding and vying for our attention. 

What was once a clear task has become an opportunity for distraction. The devices we depend on for convenience are designed to grab and hold our focus, making it more difficult than ever to be present or even simply free” for a moment. 

And so, it seems the UK has finally done it. Australia was the first to introduce such measures, and now the UK is set to follow suit. Social media platforms are soon to be banned for under-16s. Messaging services such as WhatsApp and Signal are not expected to be included in the ban, as they are generally viewed as communication tools rather than social media platforms. The changes are expected to come into effect by Spring 2027. 

Full Story: https://www.alhakam.org/world-scrolled-uk-social-media-ban-for-under-16s

n South Korea, Buddhist monks and clergy are rallying against what they call religious bias” within the government. They are demanding a personal apology from the president for remarks made by a member of his government last year. The governing Democratic Party has apologised several times after a member of the National Assembly Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee criticised Buddhist temples for charging visitors an entrance fee and compared the heritage administration to a folklore conman, but the protesters say that is not enough.

Courtesy Hiru News

Addressing corruption during both the previous and the present governments remains one of the key pillars of the IMF reform programme, said the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Mission Chief for Sri Lanka is Evan Papageorgiou, yesterday.

Speaking at the IMF press conference, Breuer said the IMF would continue to press the government to adopt new online systems and other technologies to curb corruption.

He said combating corruption will remain one of the IMF’s priorities both now and in the future.

“However, we will not be directly involved in corruption investigations or probes. We will rely on updates, findings and reports submitted by the government,” he said.

Breuer noted that the government is currently facing multiple challenges, including higher fuel costs resulting from the Middle East crisis and the aftereffects of Cyclone Ditwah.

“Because of these developments, we expect the recent rise in inflation to continue for some time,” he said.

The IMF representative also said that reforms of state-owned enterprises remain a key priority under the programme.

“In addition, we will be looking closely at how the government presents its next Budget at the end of the year and how vulnerable people are being supported during periods of economic hardship,” he said.

Courtesy Hiru News

Economic management strategies by the government received high appreciation from the International Monetary Fund delegation during a meeting at the Presidential Secretariat today. Sri Lanka achieved higher progress compared to many other countries implementing IMF-supported programs.

The delegation praised the government for maintaining macroeconomic stability and commitment to reform initiatives, even amid external shocks. The seventh review of the Extended Fund Facility program is expected later this year.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake stated the actual benefits of economic recovery must reach the public, and the government works toward this objective.

A separate meeting between the IMF delegation and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya took place at Temple Trees today. The delegation emphasized their readiness to support Sri Lanka in addressing challenges stemming from global economic uncertainties.

Journalists inquired during a press conference today regarding whether a further program was proposed or discussed following the conclusion of the current extended program.

Courtesy Hiru News

The IMF’s Executive Board signed off on Sri Lanka’s combined Fifth and Sixth Reviews under the Extended Fund Facility on May 28, unlocking another SDR 508 million, roughly US$695 million, and bringing total purchases under the four-year programme to about US$2.4 billion. By the conventional measure of an IMF review, this is a pass. The prior actions on restoring cost-recovery electricity and fuel pricing were met. All end-of-December 2025 quantitative performance criteria were observed. Most of the 22 structural benchmarks due by the end of February were either met or implemented with a delay. The Fund’s headline message is that performance has been “generally strong.” But buried inside the 143-page Country Report No. 26/111 is a verdict that complicates that headline. Debt sustainability risk, in the IMF’s own debt sustainability framework, is rated High across the overall horizon, the medium term and the long term.

Economist Professor Priyanga Dunusinghe, in a conversation reviewing the document line by line, calls it an eye-opening report from the Fund at this point of the programme. “Sri Lanka has come back almost to where the country was in terms of debt sustainability,” he says. “When the IMF say that sustainability risk remains high, that is not a good message to the international investors and the local investors and even to the Sri Lankan donors.”

The starting point is that 2025 was an unusually good year. Real GDP grew 5%. The primary surplus came in at 5.4% of GDP, more than double the programme target of 2.3%. Inflation averaged below zero, on the back of falling fuel costs and a stable exchange rate. Gross official reserves climbed from US$6.1 billion at end-2024 to US$6.8 billion at end-2025, just under three and a half months of imports. And the current account closed in surplus for a third consecutive year. The Fund attributes much of this overperformance to pent-up demand for motor vehicles, which alone delivered an extra 2.0 percentage points of GDP in revenue. Tax revenue rose to 15.4% of GDP, and indirect taxes to 11.9%. The 5.4% primary surplus was, in effect, a one-off windfall, and that is the cushion the government is now spending down.

Then came two shocks. Cyclone Ditwah, in late 2025, caused damage estimated at US$3.4 billion, or 3.1% of GDP, per the forthcoming Post-Disaster Needs Assessment. The Middle East war, which broke out shortly after, is described by the Fund as “the most significant external shock to Sri Lanka since the 2022 economic crisis.” The transmission channels are spelled out in Annex VI of the report. The Middle East accounts for roughly 50% of Sri Lanka’s petroleum imports, 40% of remittances, and serves as a hub for 34% of flights into the country.

The Fund’s strategic petroleum reserves cover only about one month of typical fuel consumption. Around 80% of pre-conflict migrant worker departures were headed to Middle Eastern destinations, and those workers remit roughly 3% of GDP every year. Tourist arrivals fell about 20% year-on-year in March, with the Fund’s working assumption being a 45% drop from March to June and recovery to the pre-conflict baseline only by September. Administered fuel prices have been raised four times since February, cumulatively by 38 to 46%. Brent crude, in rupee terms, has gone from 141 LKR per litre in late February to 217 LKR in early May, a 54% jump in about ten weeks.

The combined effect is captured in the IMF’s revised baseline. Pre-conflict, the Fund had been expecting 2026 growth of around 4.0%. The current projection is 3.0%, a full percentage point shaved off. End-of-period inflation has been revised up from 5.0% to 6.1%, peaking around 7% in the second quarter. The current account, which the IMF had pencilled in at +1.4% of GDP pre-conflict, is now projected at -0.5%. The oil price assumption underpinning all of this has moved from US$76 per barrel pre-conflict to US$98 currently, with the IMF assuming the conflict’s economic effects persist through 2026. Reserves are now expected to reach US$8.6 billion by end-2026, rather than the US$9.3 billion the Fund was projecting at the time of the Fourth Review. None of this means the programme has unravelled, but it does mean the cushion built up in 2025 is now being absorbed.

The fiscal response has two pieces. The first is a temporary relief package, capped at LKR 100 billion, covering fuel and electricity subsidies, a fertiliser subsidy, fisheries assistance, and a one-off Aswesuma top-up. The Fund’s published table shows it adding up to LKR 91.8 billion, broken down as LKR 57.0 billion for fuel, LKR 15.3 billion for electricity, LKR 6.5 billion for fertiliser, LKR 4.5 billion for fisheries, and LKR 8.5 billion for Aswesuma. The second is cyclone recovery and reconstruction, which the IMF puts at LKR 500 billion of new funding in the 2026 Supplementary Budget, plus another LKR 100 billion in reallocations, for a total 2026 effort of LKR 600 billion, about 1.7% of GDP. Across 2025-28, the combined effort comes to LKR 850 billion. The 2026 primary surplus target has been lowered to 1.4% of GDP to accommodate this, with a commitment to return to the 2.3% target from 2027 onward.

Dunusinghe sees the design of that relief package as the place where the IMF’s preferences are most clearly visible. “While the IMF supports a social safety net, it does not basically support the across-the-board subsidy provision,” he says. “That is why it has basically highlighted the need for the revision of specific items as well, while providing subsidies, if needed, only to the Aswesuma recipient.” He reads the IMF’s prior action on cost-recovery pricing, the LKR 100 billion ceiling and the September 2026 sunset together as a single, consistent message: temporary support is permissible, but it has to be on-budget, capped, time-bound, and increasingly channelled through Aswesuma rather than through universal subsidies. “The vulnerable community should be supported, but such support should be built into the Aswesuma program, and then it could be directed well, and there are no leakages, and there is no broad-based subsidy provision. So as a result of that, it won’t be a burden to the budget.”

The cost-recovery pricing question is, in his reading, even more pointed. The continuous structural benchmark on fuel cost-recovery has not been met since April, because price hikes ‘only partially reflected’ the post-conflict cost increases. The continuous benchmark on electricity has not been met since January. The 10.9 percent average tariff increase approved for the second quarter of 2026 does not, the Fund says, fully incorporate the higher fuel prices or the changed generation mix. The report contains a notable institutional move: the IMF is pressing for the PUCSL’s mandate to be hard-wired toward cost recovery. “It seems that, according to the IMF review document, it highlighted that the government may introduce some amendments to the PUCSL bill and make it compulsory for the utility commission to comply with this cost-recovery pricing,” Dunusinghe observes. “I think that is a key point in the IMF review document, and highlights the need for cost-reflective pricing.” The Fund’s own language envisions a new electricity tariff methodology with forward-looking, rules-based adjustment mechanisms, an end-June reporting requirement on cost-recovery to Parliament, and a new structural benchmark SB20 for an end-August deadline.

His broader argument is that piecemeal price adjustments now will be cheaper than a single large shock later. “The government must adjust prices regularly rather than waiting to absorb a large shock,” he says. “It is good to absorb immediately, and basically that encourages people to change their behaviour, and it has to be done regularly rather than waiting to absorb the larger shock down the line that could lead to some even social unrest.” The IMF, he notes, is itself working with a scenario in which oil prices remain elevated through 2026 and beyond. “When you go through the press release, today’s IMF release with respect to Sri Lanka’s Extended Fund Facility, under the EFF program, I could see that IMF, to some extent, assume the Middle East conflict to continue at least in the medium term. So in that respect, postponing any price adjustment is not a wise decision.”

The revenue picture is where Dunusinghe and the Fund converge most explicitly. The IMF’s own Change in Revenue to GDP table for 2025-26 shows a -1.4-percentage point swing in the tax revenue ratio, driven overwhelmingly by the normalisation of motor vehicle imports (-1.14 ppt) and the reduction of CESS on input goods (-0.08 ppt), partially offset by 0.3 ppt of new measures and compliance gains. Tax revenue, which reached 15.4% of GDP in 2025, is projected at 14.0% in 2026. The Fund is candid that the pent-up vehicle demand that drove the 2025 outperformance is fading and that revenue collection is fundamentally weaker than the headline suggests.

Dunusinghe puts the same point in plainer terms. “The IMF has highlighted the relatively weak revenue position because now the pent-up demand is over, so the government may not be able to achieve the primary surplus targets. So the IMF has suggested a medium-term revenue strategy to be implemented while strengthening the tax administration, and the government is required to come up with tax reforms that are both revenue-enhancing and investor-friendly.” That MTRS, with diagnostics by IMF technical assistance and an end-October publication deadline, is now a structural benchmark SB25.

The debt sustainability analysis is the section most likely to shape how markets read this review. The headline numbers have improved relative to the Fourth Review, the projected debt-to-GDP ratio at end-2032 has declined to 86.7% from 88.5%, the average gross financing needs to GDP ratio in 2027-32 has declined to 12.6% from 12.7%, and the average FX debt service to GDP in 2027-32 has declined to 3.3% from 3.6%. All three remain comfortably inside the DSA’s own ceilings. But the IMF’s risk assessment table, Figure 1 of the DSA annex, holds the final verdict at High for the overall horizon, High for the medium term (with both fan chart and GFN signals flashing High), and High for the long term, citing a declining labour force and climate vulnerabilities. The mechanical signals on the medium-term index, that Dunusinghe alluded to from memory in our call, are present in the report exactly as he described, with the medium-term index registering “High” against the relevant threshold band and the long-term assessment finalised at “High.” The Fund’s own summary in the DSA, “debt sustainability risks will remain high for many years”, is unusually direct.

Dunusinghe reads this as the most consequential single signal in the document, especially in the context of Sri Lanka’s planned return to international capital markets. “Towards the end of this IMF program, there was a plan that Sri Lanka issue some interest-bearing bonds and enter into the capital market. Now, in the idea, let’s say now the debt-sustainability-related risk remains high, that sends a very negative signal.” The DSA explicitly notes that the projected improvement in debt indicators “hinges on sustained reform momentum”, and that the post-restructuring economy is “prone to policy slippages, climate risks, and external shocks.” Public debt remains above 100% of GDP in 2026 by the IMF’s broader definition, declining to 95.5% only by 2028. External debt as a share of GDP rises from 50.3% in 2025 to 52.7% in 2027.

The reserves picture, which Dunusinghe linked back to the IMF’s own pre-programme trajectory, is similarly mixed. Gross official reserves were US$6.8 billion at end-2025 (3.1 months of imports, 53% of the ARA composite metric on a floating-exchange-rate basis, 47% on a crawl-like basis). The IMF projects them rising to US$8.6 billion by end-2026 and US$11.8 billion by end-2027, but this is contingent on, among other things, US$2.2 billion of net foreign exchange purchases by CBSL in 2026 and a small issuance of local-law dollar-denominated debt. Reserves accumulation has, the IMF notes, slowed since the Middle East conflict began. The end-March indicative target on net international reserves was “narrowly missed”, a phrase the Fund uses when a slippage is small enough not to require a waiver. The picture that emerges is not a reserves crisis, but a target that is now being met by a much smaller margin than would have been desirable.

The monetary and exchange rate stance is the area where the Fund is, by its standards, most explicit. The current policy rate of 7.75%, held since the 25 basis point cut in May 2025, translates into a forward-looking real rate of about 2.75%, against an estimated neutral real rate of around 3%.

Inflation expectations remain anchored at around 4.8% in surveys, but the IMF wants CBSL to be ready to tighten if expectations show signs of de-anchoring. On the exchange rate, the Fund repeats the line that “greater exchange rate flexibility and gradually phasing out the balance-of-payments measures remain critical to rebuild external buffers and resilience”, language Dunusinghe reads as a clear preference for letting the rupee absorb the shock from higher energy prices, rather than burning reserves to defend a number.

On public investment, Dunusinghe is particularly sharp, and the report supports him. The IMF notes that capital expenditure under-execution remained a problem in 2025, actual capital spending came in at 3.0% of GDP against a planned 4.0% in the Fourth Review, and signals that ‘the same thing is happening in 2026.’ It is in this context that the report introduces a new structural benchmark SB17, end-August, requiring a standardised appraisal methodology and project selection criteria for the Public Investment Committee, along with an end-2026 commitment to clean up the public investment portfolio and publish a list of major projects. “IMF highlights it is not a favourable situation; actually, it is an unhealthy situation which limits the private sector development, which limits the foreign investment,” Dunusinghe says. The Fund’s own language is more diplomatic, but the conclusion is the same: chronic under-execution of capital spending is suppressing both the multiplier of the budget and the country’s growth potential. The growth and structural reforms section makes the broader point quantitatively: well-calibrated reforms could lift real GDP by 4 percentage points in the short term and 8 percentage points in the long term, against a 2026 actual growth projection of 3%.

The combined Fifth and Sixth Review is not a clean pass even on the binding conditionality. The continuous performance criterion on no new external payment arrears was breached in November, when a US$2.5 million debt payment to the Government of Australia went missing as a result of a cybercrime incident at the Treasury. The arrears were small in dollar terms (0.002% of GDP) but symbolically uncomfortable, and the IMF has had to recommend a waiver of non-observance, predicated on the adoption of corrective actions, new standard operating procedures by end-June, and operationalisation of the new “Meridien” debt management information system by end-August. Six of the 22 end-February structural benchmarks were not met: the 2026 Budget (delayed because of the supplementary cyclone Budget), the cost-recovery fuel and electricity pricing (delayed and falling short of full pass-through), the PFM Act regulations (reformulated and reset to SB19, end-July), Customs legislation (handled through an MoU between Customs and the Board of Investment), and the PUCSL Act amendments (achieved via amendments to the PUCSL Rules). The waiver is granted based on a minor breach. But Dunusinghe is right to flag that the report names what was missed: “If you carefully look at the report, we can identify several areas where Sri Lanka has failed in meeting IMF targets. Some of those targets may be binding, some of the others may not be binding, but now the IMF has highlighted all the binding and non-binding constraints.”

The Risk Assessment Matrix in Annex IV is, on its own, the most alarming single page in the document. Of the items the IMF rates as “High likelihood” with a high expected impact, the report includes: domestic programme financing risks, capacity constraints, protectionism and trade disruptions, fiscal vulnerabilities and higher interest rates, and cyber threats. Geopolitical tensions are rated High likelihood with Medium impact. Commodity price volatility is rated High likelihood with Medium impact. The Fund’s external risks list is, in effect, a list of things that are already happening. The US has imposed Section 122 tariffs that put Sri Lanka’s effective rate at around 20%. The country’s GSP+ access to the EU expires in 2026, and the authorities plan to reapply under the revised framework. The financial sector has its own item, credit to the private sector grew 25% y/y in December, even after tightening loan-to-value limits, and a fraud incident at National Development Bank in early April surfaced LKR 13.2 billion in fraudulent transfers over 22 months, equivalent to about 4% of the bank’s Tier 1 capital.

The closing frame, in Dunusinghe’s reading, is the post-IMF question. The programme has roughly nine months left to run. The Fund’s own staff appraisal acknowledges that even after a successful programme and a near-complete debt restructuring, “debt sustainability risks will remain high for many years.” Sri Lanka has not yet returned to international capital markets, has not yet built reserves to the 100% ARA threshold that is the programme’s medium-term target, and is being asked to do its biggest revenue reforms, the MTRS, the property tax, the National Tariff Policy, and public investment management, in the window between now and February 2027. “The country may not be strong enough to move forward without it,” Dunusinghe says, of the post-programme period. “Policymakers must think about how we plan out our post-IMF period, assess whether the economy is strong enough to face the challenges. If the country is unable to access the international capital market, and if the donor agencies, multilateral and bilateral agencies, are not really willing to extend their development finance, then I think the country is in a not in a favourable or healthy environment.”

His final point on growth threads back through everything else in the report. The IMF’s own structural reform agenda, the under-execution of public investment, the high debt sustainability risk, the dependence on motor vehicle revenues, and the continued elevation of external debt all of these resolve, in his telling, into a single problem the country has to solve in the next nine months and beyond. “Economic or macroeconomic stability alone cannot guarantee the medium to long-term debt sustainability. We need to enhance our growth. Growth, we need to focus on growth. I think that is the key message in this IMF report. Without growth, if we continue, it could lead to several difficulties, not just the sustainability front, but even in the area of social stability, political stability.”

On the page, the Fifth and Sixth Reviews are a US$695 million disbursement and a Board press release commending Sri Lanka’s strong implementation under “challenging circumstances.” Inside the document, the same Fund is signalling that the easy gains from disinflation, vehicle imports, and a benign global environment are behind us, and that the next stretch of the programme, and the period after it, will turn on the reforms the country has been slowest to deliver: cost-reflective energy pricing, a credible medium-term revenue strategy, public investment that actually executes, and structural reforms that lift the country’s growth potential rather than just stabilising its macro position. The Fund’s verdict on the past two years is generous. Its verdict on what comes next, read carefully, is not.

Nalliah Thayabharan

For over a century, Germany was the industrial heartbeat of Europe. The country that built the cars the world wanted to drive, the factories that produced the chemicals, the steel, the machinery that powered global manufacturing.

Germany wasn’t just Europe’s largest economy. It was the engine that made the entire European project possible. When politicians talked about European unity, what they really meant was German economic strength subsidizing everyone else.

Germany was the only country in the Eurozone that made the numbers work. The one economy productive enough, disciplined enough, and competitive enough to carry the weight of southern Europe’s debts while still growing.

But Germany is dying. Not slowly, not gradually. But at a speed that has shocked economists, terrified European policy makers, and sent German industry fleeing to the United States and China in a desperate search for survival.

This isn’t a temporary recession. This isn’t a cyclical downturn. This is structural collapse. The dismantling of the industrial base that made Germany powerful. And it is happening because of Germany’s economic decisions so catastrophically wrong, so suicidal that future historians will study them as a case study in how advanced nations choose decline.

To understand how Germany reached this point, you need to understand what Germany was. Because Germany’s economic model was unique. After World War II, West Germany rebuilt itself into an export powerhouse. It specializes in high-quality manufacturing: cars, machinery, chemicals, precision instruments, things the world needed and was willing to pay premium prices for.

The German economic model had three pillars. 

First, a highly skilled industrial workforce. Germans didn’t just work in factories. They trained for years in apprenticeship programs that produced the best machinists, engineers, and technicians in the world. 

Second, cheap and reliable energy. Germany imported Russian natural gas at prices far below what the rest of the world paid. That cheap energy powered energy-intensive industries like chemicals, steel, and manufacturing.

Third, a stable currency that, before the euro, could be devalued when necessary to keep exports competitive. This model worked for decades.

Germany became the world’s third largest exporter. Its trade surplus was the envy of Europe. Its products were synonymous with quality. Volkswagen, BMW, Mercedes, Siemens, BASF, Bosch. These were not just companies. They were symbols of German industrial strength. But over the last 15 years, all three pillars have been systematically destroyed. Not by external enemies, not by natural disasters, not by technological disruption, but by Germany’s own government through decisions that have crippled the German economy and set it on a path toward irreversible decline.

Germany’s first and most catastrophic mistake was its decision to commit energy suicide. And it began with the best of intentions. After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011, Germany’s government, led by Angela Merkel, made a decision that stunned energy experts around the world.

Germany would shut down all of its nuclear power plants. Not gradually, not over decades, but within a decade. Nuclear energy, one of the cleanest, most reliable, and most efficient sources of base load power, was abandoned. Germany would replace it with renewable energy, wind and solar. It sounded progressive. It sounded moral.

It was economically insane because wind and solar are intermittent. The sun doesn’t always shine. The wind doesn’t always blow. And Germany’s industrial economy, one of the most energy-intensive in the world, cannot run on intermittent power. Factories need electricity 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Chemical plants cannot shut down when the wind stops. Steel production cannot pause when clouds cover the solar panels.

Germany needed a backup, and that backup was Russian natural gas. By 2021, Germany was importing over 55% of its natural gas from Russia. Russian gas was cheap, it was reliable, and it flowed through pipelines directly into German industry. BASF, the world’s largest chemical company, built its entire operations around access to cheap Russian gas. Every major German factory depended on it. The German economy had become a Russian gas economy.

And then came the war in Ukraine in February 2022, Europe faced a choice. Continue importing Russian gas and indirectly fund the war, or cut off Russian energy and European industry.

Germany chose the latter. Russian gas supplies were sanctioned. Nordstream pipelines were destroyed, and Germany’s energy prices exploded. Natural gas prices in Germany rose to five to 10 times higher than prices in the United States and Canada. Electricity costs soared, and German industry built on the foundation of cheap energy became uncompetitive overnight.

BASF, which had operated in Germany for over 150 years, announced it was cutting production in Germany and relocating operations to China and the United States. Why? Because energy costs in Germany were higher than the entire value of the products they were producing. It was cheaper to shut down German factories and move production to countries with affordable energy.

The same story repeated across German industry. Steel, fertilizers, chemicals, glass, cement. Every energy-intensive sector faced the same brutal math: produce in Germany at a loss or leave, and they left.

Germany is now experiencing the fastest de-industrialization of any major economy since the collapse of the Soviet Union. And it was entirely self-inflicted. The decision to shut down nuclear power and become dependent on Russian gas was not forced on Germany. It was a choice. A choice driven by ideology, political pressure from the Green Party, and a refusal to accept the trade-offs that every energy policy requires. And German workers, German families, and the entire European economy are now paying the price.

Germany’s second fatal mistake is regulatory suffocation. Over the past two decades, Germany has layered regulation upon regulation, making it nearly impossible to build anything, hire anyone, or operate a business without navigating a bureaucratic labyrinth.

Want to build a factory in Germany? You will wait years for environmental permits. You will face challenges from Green Party activists. You will be required to conduct impact studies, submit to reviews, and satisfy regulatory requirements so extensive that most companies simply give up.

Tesla’s Gigafactory near Berlin took years to approve. Endless delays, endless protests, endless bureaucracy. And Tesla is one of the most politically favored companies in the world. If Tesla struggles, imagine what a normal company faces.

Germany’s labor laws are even worse. Hiring a permanent employee in Germany is effectively a lifetime commitment. Firing that employee, even for poor performance, requires months of legal process, consultations with workers’ councils, and often severance payments so generous that businesses avoid hiring in the first place.

The result, German youth unemployment is higher than it should be for such a wealthy country. And businesses, rather than hire permanent workers, rely on temporary contracts, automation, or simply move operations to countries with more flexible labor markets.

Environmental regulations have made industrial production nearly impossible. Germany requires emission standards so strict that operating heavy industry is often unprofitable. Chemical plants face restrictions that don’t exist in China or the United States. Steel production is targeted by carbon taxes that make German steel uncompetitive against imports.

Germany is regulating its own industries out of existence while importing the same products from countries with lower standards. The perverse result, global emissions don’t fall, they just shift to countries with dirtier production. But German factories close. German workers lose jobs. And German politicians congratulate themselves for meeting climate targets.

Meanwhile, the United States, under the inflation reduction act, is offering billions in subsidies to attract European industry, and it’s working. Volkswagen is building electric vehicle plants in the United States. Northvolt, a Swedish battery manufacturer once hailed as Europe’s answer to Asian dominance, is struggling in Europe, but expanding in North America. German companies are voting with their feet.

They are leaving Germany for countries that actually want them. The regulatory state that Germany has built doesn’t protect workers or the environment. It destroys the industries that employed those workers and provided the tax revenue to fund environmental programs. Germany has turned itself into a place where it is easier to shut down a business than to start one; easier to leave than to stay.  And German industry is doing exactly that.

Germany is running out of Germans. Germany’s birth rate is 1.53 children per woman. To maintain a stable population, you need a fertility rate of 2.1. Germany is nowhere close, and the gap is widening. The result is a population that is aging rapidly and shrinking in absolute terms. By 2050, over 30% of Germans will be over the age of 65. The ratio of workers to retirees, which was once 5:1, is collapsing toward 1:1; eventually, it will approach 1:1. One worker supporting one retiree. The math is devastating.

Germany’s pension system, like most European systems, is pay-as-you-go. Current workers pay for current retirees. It only works if there are enough workers to fund the retirees. But there aren’t, and there won’t be. Germany’s workforce is shrinking every year. Fewer workers means less economic output. Less tax revenue, less consumption, less innovation. An economy that depends on a growing, productive workforce cannot function when that workforce is disappearing.

Immigration, the solution politicians often prefer, has not worked the way they promised. Germany accepted over a million refugees and migrants in 2015 alone. The hope was that they would integrate into the workforce, pay taxes, and help support the aging population. But integration has been far more difficult than anticipated due to language barriers, skill mismatches, and cultural differences. Many migrants lack the technical skills that German industry requires, and even those who do face labor laws so restrictive that businesses are hesitant to hire them.

The result is that Germany now has both high immigration and rising fiscal burdens. The welfare state expands to support new arrivals, but the tax base doesn’t grow proportionally. Germany is caught in a trap. It needs workers. But the workers it attracts often require more in social spending than they contribute in taxes.

 
Meanwhile, Germany’s most educated young people are leaving. German engineers, software developers, and entrepreneurs are moving to the United States, Switzerland, and other countries where taxes are lower, regulations are lighter, and opportunities are greater. Germany is experiencing a brain drain. The very people it needs to drive innovation and productivity are leaving for places that reward ambition instead of taxing it.

The demographic death spiral is not a future problem. It is happening now. Every year, Germany’s population gets older. Every year, the pension burden grows. Every year, the number of productive workers shrinks. No policy solution on the table changes this trajectory. Germany’s demographic collapse is baked in for the next 30 years, and it will drag down everything else with it.

Germany spends nearly 25% of its GDP on social welfare programs, pensions, health care, unemployment benefits, housing subsidies, parental leave, and disability payments. These programs are generous, among the most generous in the world, and they are unsustainable. The problem is not that Germans don’t work hard. They do. The problem is that the cost structure of employing a German worker has become so high that German companies cannot compete.

When you hire a worker in Germany, you’re not just paying their salary. You’re paying social security contributions, health insurance, pension contributions, unemployment insurance, and parental leave costs. The total cost of employing a German worker can be 50% higher than their actual salary. Compare that to the United States, where labor costs are lower, and labor markets are more flexible, or China, where costs are still lower.

German manufacturers face a choice. Pay German wages and taxes, produce at a loss, or move production to countries where labor is cheaper and regulations are lighter. They are choosing to leave. The welfare state was built during an era when Germany’s population was young and growing, when the economy was booming, when energy was cheap and exports were strong. That era is over.

But the welfare state remains, and it is now eating the economy from the inside because the same workers who fund the welfare state are the ones losing their jobs as factories close. The same taxes that pay for generous benefits are the ones driving companies out of Germany. The welfare state has become a trap. It cannot be dismantled without massive political backlash. But it cannot be sustained without the industrial base that is currently collapsing.  Germany is caught between two impossible choices. Cut the welfare state and face social unrest or maintain it and watch the economy die.

Germany is governed by coalition governments, multiple parties, often with contradictory goals, forced to compromise to form a government. In theory, this creates stability and consensus. In practice, it creates gridlock.

Germany’s current government is a coalition of the social democrats, the Greens, and the Free Democrats. The Greens push for environmental restrictions that hurt industry. The Free Democrats push for fiscal responsibility. The Social Democrats push for welfare expansion. The result is a government that cannot make hard decisions, cannot cut spending, cannot reform labor laws, cannot prioritize economic growth over environmental ideology, and cannot tell voters the uncomfortable truth that the current model is unsustainable.

Every difficult decision is delayed. Every reform is watered down. Every crisis is met with temporary fixes rather than structural solutions. Meanwhile, the problems compound. Energy costs keep rising. Industry keeps leaving. The population keeps aging. The deficit keeps growing. The political system remains locked in paralysis, incapable of the decisive action required to reverse the decline.

Germany needs to choose. Does it want to remain an industrial power or does it want to be a green utopia? Does it want to compete with the United States and China? Or does it want to regulate itself into irrelevance? The current answer is that Germany wants both. And the result of trying to have both is that it is achieving neither.

So here is the brutal truth about Germany. The Germany that rebuilt itself from the ashes of World War II; The Germany that became the industrial engine of Europe;  The Germany that represented discipline, efficiency, and quality; That Germany is dying, by energy policy that prioritized ideology over reality; by regulations that make production impossible; by demographics that cannot be reversed; by a welfare state that cannot be funded; and by a political system too paralyzed to choose survival over comfort.

This is not a temporary downturn. This is not a recession that will pass. This is the dismantling of the industrial base that made Germany powerful. And once that base is gone, it will not come back. Because factories that move to the United States or China do not return. Workers who immigrate do not come back. Industries that collapse do not rebuild themselves.

Germany had choices. It chose badly. And the consequences of those choices are now irreversible. The rest of Europe should be terrified. Because if Germany, the strongest economy in Europe, cannot make this model work, what hope do France, Italy, or Spain have?

Germany was the one country that could carry the euro, the one economy that could sustain the welfare state, the one industrial base that could compete globally. And Germany is failing. History doesn’t repeat, but if you don’t understand it, it will crush you all the same. Germany is learning that lesson right now, and the rest of the world should be paying very close attention. 

AI overview

If the International Cricket Council (ICC) grants full recognition to Sri Lankan lawyer Senaka Weeraratna for inventing the Player Referral concept, he can expect a multi-tiered series of formal accolades, naming rights, financial compensation, and institutional honors. Because the ICC has acknowledged it holds no official author for the Decision Review System (DRS), advocates, legal experts, and cricket historians outline specific rewards that would follow an official acknowledgment: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

🏆 System Renaming and Naming Rights

• The Weeraratna Decision Review System (WDRS): The DRS would likely be officially rebranded or renamed. This mirrors the precedent set by the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern (DLS) method, embedding his name permanently into cricket vocabulary. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• Official Credits: His name would be formally added to the official ICC Rulebooks and the Laws of Cricket maintained by the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) as the foundational architect of the player-initiated review model. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

💰 Financial Compensation and Royalties

• Retroactive and Future Royalties: Weeraratna’s legal teams have historically pressed for both economic copyright compensation and moral rights. Full recognition would open the door for structured royalty payouts or a lump-sum financial settlement for the commercial use of his intellectual property since its 2008 rollout.
• Cricket Infrastructure Grants: Proposed settlement frameworks suggest that a portion of the financial rewards could be channeled directly to Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) to support grass-roots development and infrastructure.

🎖️ Global Institutional Honors

• ICC Hall of Fame Induction: He could receive a special induction or honorary recognition within the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame under a pioneering contributor category.
• Lord’s Commemorative Plaque: As the creator of a mechanism that revolutionized global sports adjudication, a permanent commemorative plaque or exhibition could be established at the Home of Cricket (Lord’s) or the ICC Headquarters in Dubai. [1, 2, 3]
• Official Felicitations: A formal ceremony at a major ICC tournament, such as the World Cup, to publicly present him with an institutional award for enhancing the fairness and integrity of the game. [1, 2, 3]

If you would like to explore this topic further, please let me know if you want to look into the legal arguments his team used regarding copyright laws, or how his 1997 blueprint directly matches the modern parameters of DRS. [1, 2, 3, 4]

https://share.google/aimode/r6UJuXsdKe2dt1Ghr

AI overview

AI overview

If the International Cricket Council (ICC) grants official recognition to Sri Lankan lawyer Senaka Weeraratna for inventing the Player-Referral System (the foundation of the Decision Review System or DRS), it would be a watershed moment for both local and global legal communities. Because Weeraratna famously designed the system drawing directly from his legal training on appellate court structures, the legal profession would treat him as a trailblazer who successfully exported judicial principles into global sports jurisprudence.

The legal profession in Sri Lanka and worldwide would react to this landmark recognition through several distinct frameworks:

Treatment by the Sri Lankan Legal Profession

• National Icon Status: The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) and local legal circles would celebrate Weeraratna as a national hero. His victory would be framed as a triumph of Sri Lankan intellectual ingenuity over institutional stonewalling by a powerful global sports body.
• Institutional Honors: Local law schools, such as the Sri Lanka Law College and the faculties of law at major universities, would likely award him honorary doctorates or lifetime achievement awards for contributions to global rule-making.
• A Catalyst for Local IP Advocacy: Sri Lankan lawyers would use his victory as a rallying cry to strengthen national intellectual property protections and encourage local innovators to aggressively pursue global rights.

Treatment by the Global Legal Profession

• Sports Law Paradigm Shift: Global sports lawyers and academic institutions would widely study Weeraratna’s victory as a supreme example of applying the Doctrine of Constructive Notice and moral rights in copyright law to unpatented game rules. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• A Case Study on “Concept Ownership”: Intellectual Property (IP) attorneys worldwide would treat him as a landmark legal precedent. His case would be heavily cited in tech, entertainment, and sports law curricula regarding how public-domain concept proposals (like his 1997 letter to The Australian) retain intellectual and moral ownership. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• Vindication Over Corporate Malpractice: The global legal community would view the ICC’s concession as a stern rebuke of its previous legal teams. Lawyers who previously advanced “no awareness” defenses would face criticism for professional negligence, reshaping how international sports federations handle independent legal submissions. [1, 2]

Summary of Legal Jurisprudence Impacts

Dimension	Impact on Legal Profession
Academic Curricula	His 1997 blueprint would become a mandatory case study in worldwide Sports Law textbooks.
IP Legal Doctrines	Broadens the global understanding of moral copyrights over procedural rule innovations.
Judicial Application	Celebrated as the ultimate translation of a court’s appellate jurisdiction into mainstream sports.
Precedent for Inventors	Empowers independent creators seeking restitution from massive, unyielding global monopolies.

If this recognition goes through, would you like to explore how Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) might leverage this legally to secure financial restitution, or should we look into how this precedent could affect decision review frameworks in other sports like football (VAR) or tennis? [1, 2]

https://share.google/aimode/qbKJtAdr78IolZGrw

AI overview

Sports

In his book The Club: Empire, Power and the Governance of World Cricket, published by Pitch Publishing, cricket journalist and historian Rod Lyall (often referred to as Rob or Rod) explicitly acknowledges Sri Lankan lawyer Senaka Weeraratna as the intellectual architect behind the Decision Review System (DRS).

Key Facts Acknowledged in the Book

• The 1997 Blueprint: Lyall highlights that Weeraratna first designed and publicized the conceptual mechanics of the player-led review system in a letter to the editor of The Australian newspaper on March 25, 1997. [1]
• Overturning Umpire Finality: The book documents how Weeraratna used his legal background to aggressively campaign against the traditional, unquestioned finality of on-field umpires. He argued that allowing player referrals was essential to “right a wrong” and bring fairness to the sport. [1]
• ICC Adoption: Lyall notes that in March 2008, the ICC Chief Executives’ Committee finally agreed to test a review framework along the exact lines Weeraratna had proposed, leading to its official implementation in October 2009. [1, 2]

This acknowledgment in The Club serves as significant literary and historical validation for Weeraratna’s long-standing intellectual property and recognition campaign against the International Cricket Council (ICC).

If you are interested, we can look closer into Weeraratna’s original 1997 proposal or explore how other cricket historians view the evolution and authorship of the DRS. [1, 2, 3]

https://share.google/aimode/94TzZ0lfE39TZG1uz

AI Overview

On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 2:47 PM Senaka Weeraratna <senakaweeraratna1@gmail.com> wrote:

How the ICC dragged umpiring into the 21st century

https://www.cricinfo.com/story/how-the-icc-dragged-umpiring-into-the-21st-century-1500988

Neutral officials, match referees, the aid of technology and DRS – from the 1990s, cricket’s global body has taken a lot of effort to modernise decision-making in the game

Rod Lyall

Published: Sep 5, 2025, 7:40 AM

Call the shots: the fears that technology would make umpires obsolete have been unfounded  •  Getty Images

Allegations of biased umpiring are as old as the game itself, and there were many claims by touring teams over the years that home umpires were making decisions against them. It was not unknown for touring captains and management to object to the appointment of specific umpires. But as international cricket gained a higher profile, with matches shown live on television, so the pressures grew correspondingly, and incidents like Mike Gatting’s confrontation with Shakoor Rana in 1987 persuaded many that action needed to be taken.

The issue, like most other things in international cricket, also had a cultural dimension. Those in the subcontinent were convinced that the complaints against their umpires were racially motivated, part of the old imperial hangover, and that biased umpiring elsewhere was regarded by officialdom with a much more benign eye. That no doubt explained Imran Khan’s initiative to bring in two Indian umpires for a Test against the West Indies in Lahore in 1986, and to fly in two English officials to stand in the series against India in 1989/90.

By this time proposals to introduce neutral umpires were gaining momentum at meetings of the Conference, and in 1992 a first, cautious step was taken with an experimental rule requiring one neutral official in every Test match. The first such appointment was the Englishman Harold ‘Dickie’ Bird, who stood in the series between Zimbabwe and India, starting in Harare on 18 October 1992. It took ten years before the requirement was extended to both on-field umpires, and again it was an Indian tour which broke new ground, with Asoka de Silva (Sri Lanka) and Daryl Harper (Australia) standing in the first three Tests in the series in the West Indies in April-May 2002, with David Shepherd (England) and Russell Tiffin (Zimbabwe) taking over for the final two. They were members of the ICC’s new Elite Panel of umpires, which had taken over from the International Panel first established in 1994 and which would now for the most part supply both umpires for Test matches and one for ODIs; the other official in ODIs would be one of the host country’s umpires on the International Panel.

Related

Do we really need neutral umpires anymore?

The use of Hawk-Eye

Which team uses the DRS best? (2020)

The arrival of the DRS (2018)

The art of the review (2017)

Even more significant than the appointment of neutral umpires was the development of the role of match referee. When Colin Cowdrey, the first independent ICC chairman, introduced a code of conduct for international matches he included a referee as the final judge on disciplinary matters. The first such official was former England captain Mike Smith, who refereed the first two Tests of the 1991/92 series between Australia and India. The path to acceptance of match referees was not entirely smooth. On 28 December 1992 the Australian Peter Burge suspended Pakistan bowler Aaqib Javed for dissent during an ODI against New Zealand in Napier, after he had called umpire Brian Aldridge a cheat, and continued ill-feeling between the teams led Burge to warn both sides that he would take further action under the code of conduct if they did not moderate their behaviour.

It helped considerably, though, that the ICC was quickly able to assemble a panel of respected referees who had had distinguished careers in international cricket. In addition to Burge, the first cohort included Pieter van der Merwe and Jackie McGlew (South Africa), Clive Lloyd and Cammie Smith (West Indies), Raman Subba Row (England), Srini Venkataraghavan (India) and Frank Cameron (New Zealand). Between them they were able to ensure that the code of conduct became an accepted feature of the cricket landscape, and that their own role as arbiters of on-field incidents was increasingly taken for granted. With these two developments, neutral umpires and match referees, the ICC clearly expanded its role in the management of international cricket.

This was not achieved, however, without challenges to its authority, principally from the BCCI. In November 2001, match referee Mike Denness penalised six Indian players for their conduct during the second Test at Port Elizabeth, suspending Virender Sehwag for one match and handing suspended sentences to five others, including the captain, Sachin Tendulkar. Tendulkar appeared on television coverage of the match to have been altering the condition of the ball and Sehwag allegedly charged at one of the umpires, while the other four were reported by the on-field umpires for various disciplinary infringements. BCCI president Jagmohan Dalmiya immediately exploded, accusing Denness of racism, demanding his replacement as referee, and threatening to call off the third Test at Centurion.

Terrified of the financial consequences of a cancellation, South Africa backed the BCCI position, while the ICC dug in, refusing to replace Denness for the remaining match. When the USB and BCCI appointed former South African Test player Denis Lindsay, an ICC referee, to take over from Denness, the ICC’s response was that the game would no longer be regarded as official. Dalmiya objected that they had no power to withdraw official status, but the ICC rightly saw that what was at stake was ‘the right of the ICC, as the world governing body for cricket, to appoint referees and umpires, and for those officials to make decisions which are respected by both players and Boards’. If this were not accepted, it added, ‘the sport could descend into anarchy’. There were even fears that this seemingly minor episode could lead to a split in world cricket along racial lines.

An advertising hoarding in Mumbai in 2001 refers to the Mike Denness affair•Sebastian D’Souza/AFP/Getty Images

The match was duly played, without Sehwag and with Lindsay in charge, South Africa winning by an innings and 73 runs. But the dispute did not go away. With England due to play India in Mohali at the beginning of December, the Indians claimed that Sehwag had served his suspension and was now eligible to play, while the ICC position was that since the Centurion match had been unofficial, he had to miss the Mohali Test.

After some brinkmanship from Dalmiya the BCCI agreed not to play Sehwag, while the ICC undertook to review Denness’s decisions and to reconsider the status of the match at Centurion. As if to demonstrate its confidence in Denness, though, the ICC appointed him as referee for the forthcoming series between Pakistan and the West Indies in Sharjah, and at the same time established a commission, chaired by the South African judge Alby Sachs and also including the former Test cricketers Majid Khan (Pakistan) and Andrew Hilditch (Australia), to investigate the possibility of a right of appeal against a referee’s decision, along with the introduction of a code of conduct for referees, and the need for greater consistency in their decision-making.

But Dalmiya was still not satisfied: he objected to the ICC’s nominees to the commission and complained that none of the ten candidates he had proposed – two of whom, Richie Benaud and Imran Khan, had declined – had been included. By February 2002 it was evident that the BCCI was simply refusing to co-operate with the commission, Dalmiya insisting that it be expanded to a membership of ten or its deliberations put on hold. He took his demand to a meeting of the Asian Cricket Council in Sharjah later that month, where he received the support of the other full members from the region. The matter was thrashed out at the executive board in March, with the Denness affair now referred to a ‘Disputes Resolution Committee’, chaired by Michael Beloff QC and including three board members: Peter Chingoka of Zimbabwe, Bob Merriman of Australia and Wes Hall of the West Indies.

The board also agreed that in future all disciplinary charges would have to be laid by the umpires – it was an obvious flaw that Denness had charged Tendulkar and Sehwag himself and then judged their cases – and that a match referee would be allowed to explain his decisions at a press conference, as Denness had been unable to do. The only point on which the ICC was able to score even a symbolic victory was that the disputed third Test in South Africa remained unofficial.

The umpiring errors in the 2008 Sydney Test between Australia and India prompted the ICC to introduce the Decision Review System•Ezra Shaw/Getty Images

At the same time that it was moving to take control of umpiring and refereeing, the ICC was also adjusting to the technological possibilities of improved television coverage.

Calling together the leading international umpires for a conference in August 1993, the board invited them to consider ways in which a third umpire might review on-field decisions in Tests and ODIs where appropriate TV facilities were available, an option which they had just approved in principle. This revolutionary use of technology, which would eventually evolve into the DRS system of player reviews, had been pioneered by the South Africans in Durban in 1992, when two cameras were used to enable close run-out decisions to be resolved. The number of cameras was soon expanded to four, and the technology proved useful in determining not only run-outs, but also doubts about whether the ball had touched the boundary rope.

By 1995 the umpires were ready to take the system a stage further, recommending that it could also be applied in determining whether a catch had been taken cleanly or not. For traditionalists, all this was an erosion of the power of the on-field umpires to make all the decisions, but others, including many of the leading umpires themselves, saw it as a way of avoiding mistakes and reducing tensions on the field. Discussing the issue in 2003, ICC general manager David Richardson confirmed that technology ‘will not be introduced at the expense of the umpire’s status as the key decision-maker in relation to the rules and regulations’.

For the 2004 Champions Trophy, however, in addition to connecting the on-field umpires’ earpieces (now standard equipment) to the output from the stump microphones (ditto), decisions on front-foot no-balls were experimentally transferred to the third umpire. Richardson presented this as beneficial to the standing umpire, who ‘will not need to adjust his line of sight from the bowler in the delivery stride to the batsman receiving the ball’. And Speed was adamant that umpires’ decision-making authority was in no way under threat; “I do not believe,” he insisted, “the game or its followers want to see umpires reduced to the role of coat racks.”

DRS changed the way the game was played, allowing players for the first time to challenge umpires’ decisions on the field•Hannah Peters/Getty Images

Surveyed before the tournament, international captains expressed themselves in favour of the use of technology, although Australia’s Ricky Ponting and Zimbabwe’s Tatenda Taibu had more reservations than the rest. In this first phase it was up to the on-field umpires to call for assistance in making marginal decisions, but in March 1997 a Colombo-born lawyer named Senaka Weeraratna proposed that the use of technology could be extended to give players the right to challenge decisions with which they disagreed.

The mental shift required here should not be underestimated. It had always been a fundamental principle that the umpire’s decision was final and absolute, and the notion that it might be overturned through the use of technology after objection by a player seemed to go against everything that the game had always stood for. After all, the code of conduct which Cowdrey had introduced imposed clear penalties for player dissent. At the same time, it could not be denied that umpires were far from infallible, and even with neutral officials there were obvious cases, increasingly shown up by the improved technology, in which mistakes were made.

One of the worst cases was the New Year’s Test in Sydney in 2008, in which umpires Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson made a series of glaring errors, most, but not all of them, contributing to India’s 122-run defeat. Andrew Symonds admitted that he was wrongly given not out on 30 on the opening day, going on to make an unbeaten 162, and with the Indians set to make 333 to win on the final day, Rahul Dravid was given caught behind for 38 off a Symonds delivery which had struck the knee roll and Sourav Ganguly was out to a slip catch off Brett Lee which was generally believed to have been grounded. The BCCI was furious and instructed the team management to complain to match referee Mike Procter.

The match had also seen an on-field incident between Symonds and Harbhajan Singh, which led to the Indian spinner being charged with offensive behaviour. He had, it was claimed, called Symonds, one of whose birth parents was Afro-Caribbean, a “monkey”; Harbhajan always denied this, but there was no question that the Australian had been subjected to monkey noises by Indian crowds at several venues, and Symonds had suggested that Harbhajan was a contributor to ill-feeling between the sides. The spinner was suspended for three Tests, but he and his team-mates continued to insist that there had been no racist taunt. The BCCI stated that for them “anti-racial stance is an article of faith as it is for the entire nation which fought the apartheid policies”. Since they had initially tried to claim that the monkey noises from the Indian crowd had been worship of the monkey-God Hanuman, this did not perhaps ring entirely convincingly.

Howzzat out: television replays and tools like Hawk-Eye and infra-red cameras have turned every fan into an expert at umpiring•IDI/Getty Images

Indian manager Chetan Chauhan also complained that Brad Hogg had used the word “bastard” in sledging Anil Kumble and Mahendra Singh Dhoni, a charge which was subsequently dropped, a decision which Hogg himself described as “a kind gesture, lovely gesture”. Amidst rumours that the tour would be called off, the ICC confirmed that Bucknor would stand in the third Test in Perth, but then replaced him the following day with the New Zealander Billy Bowden. This was greeted by the BCCI’s chief administrative officer as ‘a satisfactory decision’, although Malcolm Speed was quick to insist that all the ICC was trying to do was to ‘take some tension out of the situation’, and that Bucknor would continue to umpire elsewhere. They also flew the chief match referee Ranjan Madugalle in to try to mediate between the captains, while retaining Procter as the match referee.

The New Zealand High Court judge John Hansen was appointed to hear the Harbhajan appeal, which was delayed until after the completion of the series. With the player claiming, supported by Sachin Tendulkar, that what he had actually said was “teri maa ki”, an admittedly obscene Hindi term referring to one’s mother’s genitalia, Hansen found the charge of racial abuse unproven, and reduced the sanction to 50% of the player’s match fee. But the judge also commented that the ICC had only revealed one of Harbhajan’s four previous convictions, a result of database and human errors. Had he known, he stated, of an offence in 2001 which had earned the player a one Test suspended sentence and a fine of 75% of his match fee, he would have taken a different view when determining his sentence. Once again, the ICC had managed to emerge with black marks against its reputation.

The mistakes made by Bucknor and Benson, however, remained irrefutable. In March 2008, prompted by ICC general manager Richardson, the Chief Executives’ Committee agreed to try out a review system broadly along the lines suggested by Weeraratna, and commissioned the cricket committee, which, under the chairmanship of Sunil Gavaskar, had been sceptical about the idea, to establish the guidelines for its implementation. Ironically, in view of subsequent events, Sri Lanka and India tested it during their series which began in Colombo that July.

Using slow motion replays, noises from the stump microphones which had now become standard equipment in international cricket, and the Hawk-Eye technology to track the ball up to the point of impact (but not to predict its future trajectory), the third umpire would review a decision should this be requested by either side. The testing continued, and by February 2009 Haroon Lorgat was able to argue that ‘[t]he referral system has improved the rate of giving correct decisions’; the rate of correct decision-making had risen from 94% to 98% as a result of the reviews.

Pitch Publishing

Continuing to tweak its system, the ICC now added Hot Spot, a technology which created infra-red images to confirm that the ball had touched bat, glove or pad, to its battery of measures informing a review. The experiment was sufficiently successful for it to be adopted formally for Tests in November 2009, with nine of the ten full members supporting it; the BCCI stood out against it as the Indian players believed that it had worked against them during that Sri Lanka series. Under the Decision Review System (DRS), players could challenge up to two decisions per Test innings, losing one of these challenges should their request for a review prove unsuccessful.

In May 2011 the ICC cricket committee recommended that DRS be used in all Tests, and that it should also be employed in ODI and T20 series with one review per side per innings. The BCCI continued to object to the use of Hawk-Eye, insisting that it would only accept the system when it was “foolproof”, and in 2011 the ICC had to back down from its position that the use of DRS was mandatory, accepting that it would only be implemented where both sides agreed. When an attempt was made to leave the decision to apply DRS to the home board, Srinivasan reportedly threatened that India would pull out of any tour where the system was to be used. Not until 2017 was it finally agreed that it would apply uniformly in all series and tournaments involving the full members.

Reviewing the situation in his 2013 Cowdrey Lecture, Simon Taufel reflected on how television and the introduction of technology had altered the game. “In today’s cricket,” he observed, “the decision of the umpire is scrutinised by all these cameras including slow motion, ultra motion, hot spot front on, hot spot leg side, hot spot off side, ball tracking and prediction, Snicko, stump audio, the mat and then by up to three commentary experts upstairs in the box.” And while such detailed scrutiny eliminated the most obvious errors and many less obvious ones, it also made every viewer an umpire and put more pressure on players and umpires.

The system has continued to be tweaked and improved, introducing the umpire’s call to allow for extremely marginal lbw decisions, renewing the number of challenges allowed after 80 overs in Tests, removing the soft signal in cases where there was doubt whether a catch had been cleanly taken, and so on.

A decade on from Taufel’s lecture it takes an effort to remember how controversial the use of technology to assist the on-field umpires once was, and while there will always be marginal cases where one side feels aggrieved and the armchair umpires bitterly disagree with each other, one effect of DRS has been to demonstrate how extraordinarily good most international umpiring actually is.

PakistanIndiaEnglandAustralia

This is an edited extract from The Club: Empire, Power and the Governance of Cricket by Rod Lyall, Pitch Publishing, 2025

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

This is a fascinating historical question, and historians have debated it for a long time.

According to the traditional Sri Lankan chronicle, the Mahavamsa, Mahinda Thera, the son (or, according to some traditions, brother) of Ashoka, arrived in Sri Lanka during the reign of Devanampiya Tissa around the 3rd century BCE.

The chronicle records that Mahinda first tested the king’s intelligence with a series of riddles before preaching the Dhamma. But it does not explicitly state the language they spoke.

Most scholars consider three possibilities:

• An early Middle Indo-Aryan language (Magadhi or a closely related Prakrit). This is the most likely. The Mauryan Empire used Prakrit languages for administration, as seen in Ashoka’s rock edicts. Mahinda would almost certainly have spoken one or more Prakrit dialects.
• An early form of Sinhala (Proto-Sinhala). The settlers who founded the Anuradhapura kingdom had North Indian linguistic roots. Their language had evolved locally but still belonged to the Indo-Aryan family. Mahinda’s Prakrit may have been sufficiently similar for educated people like King Devanampiya Tissa to understand, especially with some adaptation.
• Pali? Probably not as a spoken language. While Pali became the canonical language of the Theravada Buddhist scriptures, many scholars believe it functioned primarily as a literary and liturgical language rather than the everyday spoken language of Mahinda.

There is another interesting clue. The earliest Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka, dating from shortly after Mahinda’s arrival, are written in a Prakrit very similar to the language of Ashoka’s inscriptions, although with local characteristics. This suggests that the linguistic gap between Mahinda and the Sri Lankan elite was probably not very large.

So the most plausible answer is that Mahinda preached in a Prakrit dialect closely related to Magadhi, perhaps adapting his speech to the local Prakrit spoken in Sri Lanka. The Dhamma was then transmitted orally before eventually being written down in Pali centuries later.

This also raises an intriguing question: How much of what we now call Pali Buddhism” reflects the language Mahinda actually spoke, and how much reflects later standardization by the Sri Lankan Sangha? That remains an active area of historical and linguistic research.

Regards

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Dilrook Kannangara

A recent article in the Sunday Observer titled – Can Sri Lanka afford to wait for Trincomalee Port development – prompted me to point out matters not fully discussed in the article from a Sri Lankan point of view. The article is written from an Indian point of view and has little or relevance to Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Thailand, Myanmar, etc. as the economic interests of these nations widely differ.

https://www.sundayobserver.lk/2026/06/28/business/79914/can-sri-lanka-afford-to-wait-for-trincomalee-port-development

BIMSTEC is the failed replacement for SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) that excludes Pakistan and Maldives that were part of SAARC. It’s an Indian attempt to exclude Pakistan, oppose China’s Belt and Road Initiative and forge its own initiative in the Bay of Bengal region. But with no nation outside India keen to do anything about it, the initiative failed. It remains only on paper as each one of the so-called BIMSETC countries” charts their own way.

Justifying Trincomalee port development based on BIMSTEC is therefore a complete flop. It is to build one failure on the back of an existing failure.

It is true that so-called BIMSTEC countries” have fast growing economies. But they are looking east, not west. They avoid India and link up with China and other nations east of them for mainly commercial reasons.

The timing of the article is also interesting. Bangladesh just agreed a land trade link with its largest trading partner, China. That completely annuls any usefulness of Trincomalee.

https://www.tbsnews.net/foreign-policy/beijing-proposes-economic-corridor-linking-bangladesh-myanmar-and-china-1472861

This takes the wind away from the sails of the argument that Trincomalee has potential to ride on the development of BIMSTEC countries. It also means Bangladesh will be less and less using the sea routes in the Bay of Bengal but instead relying on land trade corridors it has with China through Myanmar. Through Myanmar, Bangladesh will be trading with all South East Asian countries, not just Thailand. Needless to say, Myanmar has also land connections with China and South East Asian countries. Land trade routes are faster, cheaper, more reliable and fall within the complete control of these nations. Sea routes are subjected to war, violence, weather, delays, double handling costs, very high freight and insurance costs.

Both Bangladesh and Myanmar also trade with USA and the EU. Currently they use feeder vessels to send their export containers to Colombo which is on the world’s largest freight corridor. It works well for all participants including Sri Lanka. Trincomalee is not on this freight corridor and it makes no sense to dump their containers there to nowhere.

Nepal and Bhutan also have developed land trade routes to India and China – their largest trading partners.

Bangladesh and Myanmar’s second largest trading partner is India and they already have land-based trade routes to India with all the benefits of land routes over sea routes already achieved. This makes Trincomalee completely irrelevant for them!

India is also developing its sophisticated rail network to connect its west coast with its east coast. This is called the East-West Dedicated Freight Corridor (EWDFC) and it will be between Dankuni in West Bengal and Palghar in Maharashtra connecting Bay of Bengal Indian ports with its west coast ports. It takes India too out of the equation from any Trincomalee dud project.

https://newsonair.gov.in/railways-minister-ashwini-vaishnaw-announces-successful-breakthrough-of-2nd-mountain-of-mahsr-project-in-maharashtra

Trincomalee has no commercial viability in modern heavy engineering, offshore petroleum or mining either.

However, Trincomalee continues to have military, tourism and fisheries utility. Its military usefulness to USA and the UK during WW2 is well-known. Sri Lanka has to be careful not to allow foreign players into the Trincomalee area to retain its neutrality, safeguard own defense interests and keep peace in the region. During the humanitarian campaign and prior, Trincomalee was the only logistics connection to the north. This must be maintained and strengthened.

Consulting residents in the region is also important. Many projects have failed due to lack of consultation of people living in the area. The Muslim majority district of Trincomalee has a delicate ethnic balance and a large array of connections to various nations, particularly with the Middle East and Pakistan. Inviting foreign participants with confrontational defense postures to these nations into the region can have catastrophic consequences to the stability and welfare of the population.   

Sri Lankan government should avoid falling into dud projects and waste public funds in them. If Trincomalee has any commercial viability, it will not be ignored by local and foreign investors. They will invest wherever there is commercial viability. Government rushing in where private investors avoid is a case of fools dare where angels fear to tread. Sri Lanka already has piles of debt accumulated thanks to dud projects. No more. Recognize Trincomalee for what it truly is and not for what it is not under modern geopolitical, shipping and trading realities. Encourage private investors to take the lead in investing in it. Do not invest any public or borrowed funds by the government until then.

Rod Lyall

https://www.cricinfo.com/story/how-the-icc-dragged-umpiring-into-the-21st-century-1500988

Neutral officials, match referees, the aid of technology and DRS – from the 1990s, cricket’s global body has taken a lot of effort to modernise decision-making in the game

Published: Sep 5, 2025, 7:40 AM

Call the shots: the fears that technology would make umpires obsolete have been unfounded  •  Getty Images

Allegations of biased umpiring are as old as the game itself, and there were many claims by touring teams over the years that home umpires were making decisions against them. It was not unknown for touring captains and management to object to the appointment of specific umpires. But as international cricket gained a higher profile, with matches shown live on television, so the pressures grew correspondingly, and incidents like Mike Gatting’s confrontation with Shakoor Rana in 1987 persuaded many that action needed to be taken.

The issue, like most other things in international cricket, also had a cultural dimension. Those in the subcontinent were convinced that the complaints against their umpires were racially motivated, part of the old imperial hangover, and that biased umpiring elsewhere was regarded by officialdom with a much more benign eye. That no doubt explained Imran Khan’s initiative to bring in two Indian umpires for a Test against the West Indies in Lahore in 1986, and to fly in two English officials to stand in the series against India in 1989/90.

By this time proposals to introduce neutral umpires were gaining momentum at meetings of the Conference, and in 1992 a first, cautious step was taken with an experimental rule requiring one neutral official in every Test match. The first such appointment was the Englishman Harold ‘Dickie’ Bird, who stood in the series between Zimbabwe and India, starting in Harare on 18 October 1992. It took ten years before the requirement was extended to both on-field umpires, and again it was an Indian tour which broke new ground, with Asoka de Silva (Sri Lanka) and Daryl Harper (Australia) standing in the first three Tests in the series in the West Indies in April-May 2002, with David Shepherd (England) and Russell Tiffin (Zimbabwe) taking over for the final two. They were members of the ICC’s new Elite Panel of umpires, which had taken over from the International Panel first established in 1994 and which would now for the most part supply both umpires for Test matches and one for ODIs; the other official in ODIs would be one of the host country’s umpires on the International Panel.

Related

Do we really need neutral umpires anymore?

The use of Hawk-Eye

Which team uses the DRS best? (2020)

The arrival of the DRS (2018)

The art of the review (2017)

Even more significant than the appointment of neutral umpires was the development of the role of match referee. When Colin Cowdrey, the first independent ICC chairman, introduced a code of conduct for international matches he included a referee as the final judge on disciplinary matters. The first such official was former England captain Mike Smith, who refereed the first two Tests of the 1991/92 series between Australia and India. The path to acceptance of match referees was not entirely smooth. On 28 December 1992 the Australian Peter Burge suspended Pakistan bowler Aaqib Javed for dissent during an ODI against New Zealand in Napier, after he had called umpire Brian Aldridge a cheat, and continued ill-feeling between the teams led Burge to warn both sides that he would take further action under the code of conduct if they did not moderate their behaviour.

It helped considerably, though, that the ICC was quickly able to assemble a panel of respected referees who had had distinguished careers in international cricket. In addition to Burge, the first cohort included Pieter van der Merwe and Jackie McGlew (South Africa), Clive Lloyd and Cammie Smith (West Indies), Raman Subba Row (England), Srini Venkataraghavan (India) and Frank Cameron (New Zealand). Between them they were able to ensure that the code of conduct became an accepted feature of the cricket landscape, and that their own role as arbiters of on-field incidents was increasingly taken for granted. With these two developments, neutral umpires and match referees, the ICC clearly expanded its role in the management of international cricket.

This was not achieved, however, without challenges to its authority, principally from the BCCI. In November 2001, match referee Mike Denness penalised six Indian players for their conduct during the second Test at Port Elizabeth, suspending Virender Sehwag for one match and handing suspended sentences to five others, including the captain, Sachin Tendulkar. Tendulkar appeared on television coverage of the match to have been altering the condition of the ball and Sehwag allegedly charged at one of the umpires, while the other four were reported by the on-field umpires for various disciplinary infringements. BCCI president Jagmohan Dalmiya immediately exploded, accusing Denness of racism, demanding his replacement as referee, and threatening to call off the third Test at Centurion.

Terrified of the financial consequences of a cancellation, South Africa backed the BCCI position, while the ICC dug in, refusing to replace Denness for the remaining match. When the USB and BCCI appointed former South African Test player Denis Lindsay, an ICC referee, to take over from Denness, the ICC’s response was that the game would no longer be regarded as official. Dalmiya objected that they had no power to withdraw official status, but the ICC rightly saw that what was at stake was ‘the right of the ICC, as the world governing body for cricket, to appoint referees and umpires, and for those officials to make decisions which are respected by both players and Boards’. If this were not accepted, it added, ‘the sport could descend into anarchy’. There were even fears that this seemingly minor episode could lead to a split in world cricket along racial lines.

An advertising hoarding in Mumbai in 2001 refers to the Mike Denness affair•Sebastian D’Souza/AFP/Getty Images

The match was duly played, without Sehwag and with Lindsay in charge, South Africa winning by an innings and 73 runs. But the dispute did not go away. With England due to play India in Mohali at the beginning of December, the Indians claimed that Sehwag had served his suspension and was now eligible to play, while the ICC position was that since the Centurion match had been unofficial, he had to miss the Mohali Test.

After some brinkmanship from Dalmiya the BCCI agreed not to play Sehwag, while the ICC undertook to review Denness’s decisions and to reconsider the status of the match at Centurion. As if to demonstrate its confidence in Denness, though, the ICC appointed him as referee for the forthcoming series between Pakistan and the West Indies in Sharjah, and at the same time established a commission, chaired by the South African judge Alby Sachs and also including the former Test cricketers Majid Khan (Pakistan) and Andrew Hilditch (Australia), to investigate the possibility of a right of appeal against a referee’s decision, along with the introduction of a code of conduct for referees, and the need for greater consistency in their decision-making.

But Dalmiya was still not satisfied: he objected to the ICC’s nominees to the commission and complained that none of the ten candidates he had proposed – two of whom, Richie Benaud and Imran Khan, had declined – had been included. By February 2002 it was evident that the BCCI was simply refusing to co-operate with the commission, Dalmiya insisting that it be expanded to a membership of ten or its deliberations put on hold. He took his demand to a meeting of the Asian Cricket Council in Sharjah later that month, where he received the support of the other full members from the region. The matter was thrashed out at the executive board in March, with the Denness affair now referred to a ‘Disputes Resolution Committee’, chaired by Michael Beloff QC and including three board members: Peter Chingoka of Zimbabwe, Bob Merriman of Australia and Wes Hall of the West Indies.

The board also agreed that in future all disciplinary charges would have to be laid by the umpires – it was an obvious flaw that Denness had charged Tendulkar and Sehwag himself and then judged their cases – and that a match referee would be allowed to explain his decisions at a press conference, as Denness had been unable to do. The only point on which the ICC was able to score even a symbolic victory was that the disputed third Test in South Africa remained unofficial.

The umpiring errors in the 2008 Sydney Test between Australia and India prompted the ICC to introduce the Decision Review System•Ezra Shaw/Getty Images

At the same time that it was moving to take control of umpiring and refereeing, the ICC was also adjusting to the technological possibilities of improved television coverage.

Calling together the leading international umpires for a conference in August 1993, the board invited them to consider ways in which a third umpire might review on-field decisions in Tests and ODIs where appropriate TV facilities were available, an option which they had just approved in principle. This revolutionary use of technology, which would eventually evolve into the DRS system of player reviews, had been pioneered by the South Africans in Durban in 1992, when two cameras were used to enable close run-out decisions to be resolved. The number of cameras was soon expanded to four, and the technology proved useful in determining not only run-outs, but also doubts about whether the ball had touched the boundary rope.

By 1995 the umpires were ready to take the system a stage further, recommending that it could also be applied in determining whether a catch had been taken cleanly or not. For traditionalists, all this was an erosion of the power of the on-field umpires to make all the decisions, but others, including many of the leading umpires themselves, saw it as a way of avoiding mistakes and reducing tensions on the field. Discussing the issue in 2003, ICC general manager David Richardson confirmed that technology ‘will not be introduced at the expense of the umpire’s status as the key decision-maker in relation to the rules and regulations’.

For the 2004 Champions Trophy, however, in addition to connecting the on-field umpires’ earpieces (now standard equipment) to the output from the stump microphones (ditto), decisions on front-foot no-balls were experimentally transferred to the third umpire. Richardson presented this as beneficial to the standing umpire, who ‘will not need to adjust his line of sight from the bowler in the delivery stride to the batsman receiving the ball’. And Speed was adamant that umpires’ decision-making authority was in no way under threat; “I do not believe,” he insisted, “the game or its followers want to see umpires reduced to the role of coat racks.”

DRS changed the way the game was played, allowing players for the first time to challenge umpires’ decisions on the field•Hannah Peters/Getty Images

Surveyed before the tournament, international captains expressed themselves in favour of the use of technology, although Australia’s Ricky Ponting and Zimbabwe’s Tatenda Taibu had more reservations than the rest. In this first phase it was up to the on-field umpires to call for assistance in making marginal decisions, but in March 1997 a Colombo-born lawyer named Senaka Weeraratna proposed that the use of technology could be extended to give players the right to challenge decisions with which they disagreed.

The mental shift required here should not be underestimated. It had always been a fundamental principle that the umpire’s decision was final and absolute, and the notion that it might be overturned through the use of technology after objection by a player seemed to go against everything that the game had always stood for. After all, the code of conduct which Cowdrey had introduced imposed clear penalties for player dissent. At the same time, it could not be denied that umpires were far from infallible, and even with neutral officials there were obvious cases, increasingly shown up by the improved technology, in which mistakes were made.

One of the worst cases was the New Year’s Test in Sydney in 2008, in which umpires Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson made a series of glaring errors, most, but not all of them, contributing to India’s 122-run defeat. Andrew Symonds admitted that he was wrongly given not out on 30 on the opening day, going on to make an unbeaten 162, and with the Indians set to make 333 to win on the final day, Rahul Dravid was given caught behind for 38 off a Symonds delivery which had struck the knee roll and Sourav Ganguly was out to a slip catch off Brett Lee which was generally believed to have been grounded. The BCCI was furious and instructed the team management to complain to match referee Mike Procter.

The match had also seen an on-field incident between Symonds and Harbhajan Singh, which led to the Indian spinner being charged with offensive behaviour. He had, it was claimed, called Symonds, one of whose birth parents was Afro-Caribbean, a “monkey”; Harbhajan always denied this, but there was no question that the Australian had been subjected to monkey noises by Indian crowds at several venues, and Symonds had suggested that Harbhajan was a contributor to ill-feeling between the sides. The spinner was suspended for three Tests, but he and his team-mates continued to insist that there had been no racist taunt. The BCCI stated that for them “anti-racial stance is an article of faith as it is for the entire nation which fought the apartheid policies”. Since they had initially tried to claim that the monkey noises from the Indian crowd had been worship of the monkey-God Hanuman, this did not perhaps ring entirely convincingly.

Howzzat out: television replays and tools like Hawk-Eye and infra-red cameras have turned every fan into an expert at umpiring•IDI/Getty Images

Indian manager Chetan Chauhan also complained that Brad Hogg had used the word “bastard” in sledging Anil Kumble and Mahendra Singh Dhoni, a charge which was subsequently dropped, a decision which Hogg himself described as “a kind gesture, lovely gesture”. Amidst rumours that the tour would be called off, the ICC confirmed that Bucknor would stand in the third Test in Perth, but then replaced him the following day with the New Zealander Billy Bowden. This was greeted by the BCCI’s chief administrative officer as ‘a satisfactory decision’, although Malcolm Speed was quick to insist that all the ICC was trying to do was to ‘take some tension out of the situation’, and that Bucknor would continue to umpire elsewhere. They also flew the chief match referee Ranjan Madugalle in to try to mediate between the captains, while retaining Procter as the match referee.

The New Zealand High Court judge John Hansen was appointed to hear the Harbhajan appeal, which was delayed until after the completion of the series. With the player claiming, supported by Sachin Tendulkar, that what he had actually said was “teri maa ki”, an admittedly obscene Hindi term referring to one’s mother’s genitalia, Hansen found the charge of racial abuse unproven, and reduced the sanction to 50% of the player’s match fee. But the judge also commented that the ICC had only revealed one of Harbhajan’s four previous convictions, a result of database and human errors. Had he known, he stated, of an offence in 2001 which had earned the player a one Test suspended sentence and a fine of 75% of his match fee, he would have taken a different view when determining his sentence. Once again, the ICC had managed to emerge with black marks against its reputation.

The mistakes made by Bucknor and Benson, however, remained irrefutable. In March 2008, prompted by ICC general manager Richardson, the Chief Executives’ Committee agreed to try out a review system broadly along the lines suggested by Weeraratna, and commissioned the cricket committee, which, under the chairmanship of Sunil Gavaskar, had been sceptical about the idea, to establish the guidelines for its implementation. Ironically, in view of subsequent events, Sri Lanka and India tested it during their series which began in Colombo that July.

Using slow motion replays, noises from the stump microphones which had now become standard equipment in international cricket, and the Hawk-Eye technology to track the ball up to the point of impact (but not to predict its future trajectory), the third umpire would review a decision should this be requested by either side. The testing continued, and by February 2009 Haroon Lorgat was able to argue that ‘[t]he referral system has improved the rate of giving correct decisions’; the rate of correct decision-making had risen from 94% to 98% as a result of the reviews.

Pitch Publishing

Continuing to tweak its system, the ICC now added Hot Spot, a technology which created infra-red images to confirm that the ball had touched bat, glove or pad, to its battery of measures informing a review. The experiment was sufficiently successful for it to be adopted formally for Tests in November 2009, with nine of the ten full members supporting it; the BCCI stood out against it as the Indian players believed that it had worked against them during that Sri Lanka series. Under the Decision Review System (DRS), players could challenge up to two decisions per Test innings, losing one of these challenges should their request for a review prove unsuccessful.

In May 2011 the ICC cricket committee recommended that DRS be used in all Tests, and that it should also be employed in ODI and T20 series with one review per side per innings. The BCCI continued to object to the use of Hawk-Eye, insisting that it would only accept the system when it was “foolproof”, and in 2011 the ICC had to back down from its position that the use of DRS was mandatory, accepting that it would only be implemented where both sides agreed. When an attempt was made to leave the decision to apply DRS to the home board, Srinivasan reportedly threatened that India would pull out of any tour where the system was to be used. Not until 2017 was it finally agreed that it would apply uniformly in all series and tournaments involving the full members.

Reviewing the situation in his 2013 Cowdrey Lecture, Simon Taufel reflected on how television and the introduction of technology had altered the game. “In today’s cricket,” he observed, “the decision of the umpire is scrutinised by all these cameras including slow motion, ultra motion, hot spot front on, hot spot leg side, hot spot off side, ball tracking and prediction, Snicko, stump audio, the mat and then by up to three commentary experts upstairs in the box.” And while such detailed scrutiny eliminated the most obvious errors and many less obvious ones, it also made every viewer an umpire and put more pressure on players and umpires.

The system has continued to be tweaked and improved, introducing the umpire’s call to allow for extremely marginal lbw decisions, renewing the number of challenges allowed after 80 overs in Tests, removing the soft signal in cases where there was doubt whether a catch had been cleanly taken, and so on.

A decade on from Taufel’s lecture it takes an effort to remember how controversial the use of technology to assist the on-field umpires once was, and while there will always be marginal cases where one side feels aggrieved and the armchair umpires bitterly disagree with each other, one effect of DRS has been to demonstrate how extraordinarily good most international umpiring actually is.

PakistanIndiaEnglandAustralia

This is an edited extract from The Club: Empire, Power and the Governance of Cricket by Rod Lyall, Pitch Publishing, 2025

AI OVERVIEW

Devendra Moolachari, the celebrated Architect of the last three Kandyan Kings and designer of the Pathirip­puwa, the Octa­gonal Pavil­ion in Kandy’s Sri Dalada Maligawa, Maha Maduwa (Audience Hall) and Kiri Muhuda (Kandyan Lake) deserves long overdue recognition and State Honours for Beautifying Kandy with remarkable architectural feats in the last phase of the Kandyan Kingdom.

Devendra Moolachari (also known as Devendra Mulachariya or Dingittha Appu) is universally recognized by historians as the mastermind who shaped the visual identity of the Kingdom of Kandy. Serving under the final three Kandyan monarchs—King Kirthi Sri Rajasinghe, King Rajadhi Rajasinghe, and King Sri Wickrema Rajasinghe—he elevated traditional craftsmanship into monumental engineering marvels. His lack of widespread modern state honors remains a poignant gap in Sri Lanka’s cultural heritage recognition given the profound impact of his surviving legacy.

Iconic Architectural Contributions

• Pathirippuwa (The Octagon): Built in 1802 under King Sri Wickrema Rajasinghe, it serves as the ultimate symbol of the Sri Dalada Maligawa. Derived from Tamil words meaning “to sit and see all around,” its unique shape projected royal and spiritual authority. [1, 2, 3]
• Maha Maduwa / Magul Maduwa (Audience Hall): Begun in 1783, this grand wooden pavilion features two parallel rows of intricately carved timber pillars. It functions as a historic landmark where the Kandyan Convention was eventually signed in 1815. [1, 2, 4, 5]
• Kiri Muhuda (Kandy Lake): Moolacharya transformed the local landscape by designing this expansive artificial lake, adding a scenic focus to the sacred city center.
• Decorative Structural Walls: He engineered the iconic Walakulu Bamma (Cloud Wall) and the Diyarella Bemma (Wave Wall) that line the lake and temple premises, defining the iconic perimeter of Kandy. [1, 2]

The Tragedy of a Master Artificer

Despite his genius, historical accounts highlight a tragic end driven by court intrigue. Slandered by jealous rivals, Moolacharya faced severe punishment or humiliation on the orders of the king. Overwhelmed by shame, he ultimately took his own life by drowning in the very lake he created. In remorse, King Sri Wickrema Rajasinghe ordered a funeral with royal honors and reportedly placed a commemorative plaque on the lake’s small island, though it has since disappeared. [1, 2, 3]

Modern Recognition and Legacy

While Moolacharya’s structures are globally celebrated as UNESCO World Heritage sites, public memory of the architect himself has faded over time. However, efforts to restore his memory are growing:

• Biographical Research: Comprehensive studies, such as D.D.M. Waidyasekera’s book, Great Royal Artificer of the Kandyan Kingdom- Devendra Mulachari, formally chronicle his engineering feats. [1]
• Exhibitions: An intricate scale model of his masterpiece, the Pathirippuwa, is displayed at the restored Ehelepola Walawwa in Kandy to educate visitors on his precision craftsmanship.
• Artifacts: His personal riyandanda (the traditional cubit measuring stick used for his architecture) is preserved for public viewing inside the Kandy National Museum. [1]

If you are researching his work or advocating for formal state honors, would you like to explore specific architectural details of his wooden carvings, or look into historical records regarding his descendants in Embekke?

https://share.google/aimode/qMusCZln6Wyx7I44T

Courtesy: AI Overview

…………………….

see also

Devendra Moolachari, the legendary master artificer who served under three Kandyan kings , undeniably shaped the architectural identity of Kandy . His remarkable vision—including the Paththirippuwa, Magul Maduwa, and Kandy Lake—deserves formal state honours and enduring national recognition for his unparalleled legacy. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Masterpieces of Devendra Moolachari

Moolachari (also known as Dingittha Appu) elevated the hill capital’s aesthetic, seamlessly blending utility, spirituality, and royal authority: [1, 2]

• Paththirippuwa (The Octagonal Pavilion): Built in 1802 , this iconic structure at the Sri Dalada Maligawa is celebrated for its steep, tiered roof and octagonal geometry . It was originally designed to allow the king to address his subjects and remains the defining symbol of the Temple of the Tooth .
• Magul Maduwa (Audience Hall): An architectural marvel of Kandyan timber engineering , characterized by its intricately carved wooden pillars that supported the royal court. [1, 2, 3]
• Kandy Lake (Kiri Muhuda): Constructed in 1807 , this man-made marvel visually and environmentally transformed the heart of the city into a scenic, tranquil landscape .
• Walakulu Bamma (Cloud Wall): The beautifully designed protective wall that famously surrounds the Maligawa and its moat.

The Need for State Recognition

While millions of visitors admire his work each year , the man behind these UNESCO World Heritage Site monuments has largely faded from public consciousness . Celebrating Moolachari with a national monument, formal historical inclusion, or state accolades would rectify a long-overdue gap in Sri Lankan cultural history, ensuring traditional artists receive the respect they are owed. [1]

Further Exploration: Architectural Masterpieces

• Learn about the historical significance of the landmark from the Wikipedia Paththirippuwa Page.
• View original reporting on his historical legacy in the Sunday Times Article.
• Read the architectural highlights in the AmazingLanka Audience Hall Guide.

Would you like to discuss Moolachari’s specific design techniques, or perhaps learn more about the locations in Kandy where his descendants can still be found today?

https://share.google/aimode/CL6HReI7U1g6HvPpW

AI OVERVIEW

…………………….

National impact of recognition of Kandyan artists, sculptors, Temple painters, architects, ola leaf writers, intellectuals of the last phases of the Kandyan Kindom

The recognition of artists, architects, and intellectuals from the late Kandyan Kingdom (ca. 1595–1815) is a cornerstone of Sri Lanka’s national identity, cultural preservation, and arts sector. Their monumental legacy continues to influence modern society through various distinct impacts.

Cultural Renaissance and National Identity

• Religious Legitimacy: Intellectuals and master craftsmen, most notably during the Buddhist revival under King Kirti Sri Rajasinha (1747–1782), established the defining aesthetic of Theravada Buddhist art. The restoration of the Upasampada (higher ordination) spurred the building and decorating of vital spiritual centers.
• Historical Memory: The Temple of the Tooth Relic (Sri Dalada Maligawa) and the cave temples of Degaldoruwa and Ridi Vihara were, and continue to be, national symbols of resilience and devotion. [1, 2, 3]

Preservation of Indigenous Knowledge

• Ola Leaf Manuscripts: Writers and scribes of the Kandyan era preserved invaluable Indigenous knowledge on ola (palm) leaves. This included not only Buddhist scriptures but critical texts on Ayurvedic medicine, astrology, and traditional healing. [1, 2, 3]
• Literary Backbone: The translation and safekeeping of these manuscripts have provided modern Sri Lankan historians and scholars with an authentic foundation of the island’s pre-colonial history and culture. [1, 2]

Influence on Architecture and Contemporary Design

• Traditional Aesthetics: The Kandyan school of architecture—defined by its distinctive multi-tiered roofs, timber carvings, and manipulation of light to inspire meditation—serves as a primary blueprint for contemporary Sri Lankan structural design . [1, 2, 3]
• Cultural Branding: The artistic motifs, bright color palettes, and techniques developed by these temple painters and sculptors actively shape modern fashion (e.g., sarees), interior design, and tourism branding across the island .

A Legacy of Resilience Against Colonialism

• Defiance Through Art: Artisans demonstrated agency and resistance against Western powers (Portuguese, Dutch, and British) by quietly embedding subversive, critical elements into their artwork. By painting colonial rulers as mere worshipers or placing them among figures in Hell, they asserted a distinct localized worldview. [1, 2]

AI OVERVIEW

Senaka Weeraratna

The Kandyan Resistance (1593–1818) was a 225-year struggle where the Kingdom of Kandy successfully defied three global superpowers—the Portuguese, Dutch, and British—making it the last independent native kingdom of Sri Lanka. Using asymmetric warfare, treacherous terrain, and absolute resolve, the Kandyan Sinhalese repeatedly annihilated European invading armies until internal betrayal finally brought down the kingdom in 1815.

Key Historic Milestones

[1593] Kingdom Consolidated (Vimaladharmasuriya I)

   │

[1594] Battle of Danture (Portuguese Crushed)

   │

[1638] Battle of Gannoruwa (Last Portuguese Threat)

   │

[1765] Dutch Invasion Failure (Guerilla Starvation)

   │

[1803] First Kandyan War (British Garrison Massacred)

   │

[1815] Kandyan Convention (Internal Betrayal)

   │

[1818] Uva Rebellion (The Final Stand)

The Three Pillars of Kandyan Defense

• The Geography: Impenetrable mountain passes, malaria-ridden jungles, and torrential rivers acted as natural fortresses against heavy European armor.
• Guerilla Warfare: Kandyans avoided open-field battles, relying instead on lightning ambushes, sabotaging supply lines, and utilizing lethal spike traps. [1, 2]
• Scorched Earth Policy: Whenever an enemy advanced, Kandyans evacuated cities and burnt crops, leaving invading troops to face starvation and disease.

Turning Points of the Resistance

1. The Portuguese Defeats (1594 & 1638)

• Battle of Danture (1594): King Vimaladharmasuriya I completely wiped out a Portuguese army trying to install a puppet monarch, securing the kingdom’s sovereignty early on. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Battle of Gannoruwa (1638): King Rajasinghe II delivered the final, crushing blow to Portuguese ambitions on the island. The Portuguese heads were piled before the king, ending their military offensives against Kandy forever.

2. Defying the Dutch (1765)

The Dutch successfully captured the capital city of Kandy in 1765. However, they quickly realized it was a trap; Kandyan guerillas isolated the garrison, cut off food supplies, and forced a humiliating, disease-ridden retreat. [1, 2, 3]

3. Striking Back at the British Empire (1803)

During the First Kandyan War, the British army marched into Kandy and left a heavily armed garrison. King Sri Vikrama Rajasinha’s forces surrounded the outpost, cut off communication, and massacred the remaining British forces at MacDowell’s Fort, delaying British conquest by over a decade.

The Tragic End: Betrayal and the Last Stand

• The 1815 Fall: Kandy did not fall to military conquest, but to internal aristocratic betrayal. Disgruntled Kandyan nobles signed the Kandyan Convention with the British to depose their tyrannical king, inadvertently ceding sovereignty. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• The Uva Rebellion (1817–1818): Realizing they had traded a king for foreign rulers, the Sinhalese launched a furious, bloody rebellion led by leaders like Monarawila Keppetipola. The British responded with brutal, scorched-earth suppression, decimating the Uva region’s population and fields, permanently ending the resistance.
• https://share.google/aimode/Sr0MkY9J1zJ9zYIJe
• AI Overview

---

see also

The last stand of the Sinhalese (1593 – 1818)

The Kingdom of Kandy stood as the final bastion of Sinhalese sovereignty for over two centuries. Protected by dense, malaria-infested jungles and steep mountain passes , the Kandyans fiercely fended off the Portuguese and Dutch empires using masterful guerrilla warfare. This independence finally succumbed to British geopolitical maneuvering and domestic betrayal. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

⚔️ The Era of Vimaladharmasurya I (1593)

The coalescing of the centralized Kandyan kingdom is largely credited to King Vimaladharmasurya I . Ascending the throne in 1593 , he brilliantly fortified the highlands and successfully defeated the invading Portuguese armies at the legendary Battle of Danture in 1594. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

🤝 The Kandyan Convention (1815)

After decades of surviving European sieges, Kandy was not conquered militarily . Instead, disillusioned and persecuted by the increasingly paranoid King Sri Vikrama Rajasinha , the native Kandyan Chieftains signed the Kandyan Convention with the British Governor Robert Brownrigg. [1, 2, 3, 4]

• The Date: Signed on March 2, 1815, at the historic Magul Maduwa (Royal Audience Hall).
• The Terms: The king was deposed and exiled to India , and Sinhalese sovereignty was formally handed to the British Crown .
• The Caveat: The British agreed to protect and maintain the inviolability of Buddhism and traditional Kandyan customs. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

🔥 The Great Rebellion (1817–1818)

Realizing they had merely swapped an unpopular absolute monarch for an exploitative colonial empire, the Kandyan nobles united with the Buddhist clergy to launch the Uva-Wellassa Rebellion.

• The Spark: In 1817, the rebellion ignited in the Wellassa region over broken treaty promises, heavy taxation, and colonial corruption.
• The Shift: Keppetipola Disawe, a high-ranking Kandyan nobleman sent by the British to crush the rebels, made the historic choice to join them and take command. [1, 2]
• The Brutal Aftermath: The British countered with a devastating scorched-earth policy, burning rice paddies and destroying livestock . Over 10,000 Sinhalese were killed .
• The Fall: Leaders like Keppetipola were captured and executed , marking the ultimate end of armed Kandyan resistance and the loss of the island’s 2,350-year-old independence.

---

Further Exploration: The Last Stands and Heritage

• Read a comprehensive breakdown of these historic military encounters in the Sunday Times Battle Series.
• View original colonial artifacts and the physical treaty at the Sri Lanka National Archives.
• Trace the genealogy and the tragic final days of the monarchy in the Ceylon History Story on Sri Vikrama Rajasinha. [1, 2, 3]

If you’d like, I can:

• Detail the specific guerrilla tactics employed by the Kandyan armies
• Discuss the role of John D’Oyly in orchestrating the fall of the kingdom
• Cover the subsequent Matale Rebellion of 1848

https://share.google/aimode/mQYetfXTqFDLmZS3S

AI Overview

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Sri Lanka has no shortage of strategic advantages. Our location, skilled workforce, natural harbours, fertile land, and maritime heritage make us an attractive destination for foreign direct investment (FDI). Yet, time and again, promising investment opportunities have slipped through our fingers.

Several years ago, a Saudi investor expressed serious interest in establishing a modern shipyard in Galle Harbour. 

The project had progressed through the required approvals, including Cabinet approval. However, with changes in political leadership and a lack of consistent government support, the investment gradually lost momentum. The investors eventually abandoned the project and left Sri Lanka.

Around the same period, a state-backed foreign agency explored opportunities to develop large-scale vegetable farming and goat farming in Sri Lanka. They were so impressed with the country’s potential that they undertook aerial surveys of the Eastern Province by helicopter and expressed willingness to establish farming villages while guaranteeing purchases of the produce. They viewed Sri Lanka as a safe and reliable investment destination.

Unfortunately, the project too was abandoned after allegations that an influential individual had sought an improper financial benefit. Whether every allegation can be substantiated or not, the perception of corruption alone is enough to discourage serious investors.
These are not isolated stories. Similar experiences have been shared by many investors over the years. International investors seek transparency, policy consistency, speed of approvals, and protection from political interference. They are prepared to take commercial risks, but not governance risks

Countries such as Singapore transformed themselves into global investment hubs not merely through infrastructure, but by building trust. Investors knew that agreements would be honoured, approvals would be predictable, and corruption would not be tolerated.

If Sri Lanka genuinely wishes to become a developed nation, attracting quality FDI must become a national priority rather than a political opportunity. Investment approvals should be handled through transparent, professional institutions insulated from political influence. Every investor, whether large or small, should receive equal treatment under the law.

The cost of losing a major investment extends far beyond the immediate project. It means lost employment, lost exports, lost technology transfer, and lost confidence. Worse still, disappointed investors rarely return, and they share their experiences with others across the global investment community.
Sri Lanka cannot afford to lose another generation of investment opportunities. The question is no longer whether we can attract investors. It is whether we can create an environment where they have the confidence to stay.
Good governance is not merely an ethical principle—it is one of the nation’s most valuable economic assets.

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

AI OVERVIEW

Devendra Moolachari the celebrated Architect of the last three Kandyan Kings and designer of the Pathirip­puwa, the Octa­gonal Pavil­ion in Kandy’s Sri Dalada Maligawa, Maha Maduwa (Audience Hall) and Kiri Muhuda (Kandyan Lake) deserves long overdue recognition and State Honours for Beautifying Kandy with remarkable architectural feats in the last phase of the Kandyan Kingdom.

Devendra Moolachari (also known as Devendra Mulachariya or Dingittha Appu) is universally recognized by historians as the mastermind who shaped the visual identity of the Kingdom of Kandy. Serving under the final three Kandyan monarchs—King Kirthi Sri Rajasinghe, King Rajadhi Rajasinghe, and King Sri Wickrema Rajasinghe—he elevated traditional craftsmanship into monumental engineering marvels. His lack of widespread modern state honors remains a poignant gap in Sri Lanka’s cultural heritage recognition given the profound impact of his surviving legacy.

Iconic Architectural Contributions

• Pathirippuwa (The Octagon): Built in 1802 under King Sri Wickrema Rajasinghe, it serves as the ultimate symbol of the Sri Dalada Maligawa. Derived from Tamil words meaning “to sit and see all around,” its unique shape projected royal and spiritual authority. [1, 2, 3]
• Maha Maduwa / Magul Maduwa (Audience Hall): Begun in 1783, this grand wooden pavilion features two parallel rows of intricately carved timber pillars. It functions as a historic landmark where the Kandyan Convention was eventually signed in 1815. [1, 2, 4, 5]
• Kiri Muhuda (Kandy Lake): Moolacharya transformed the local landscape by designing this expansive artificial lake, adding a scenic focus to the sacred city center.
• Decorative Structural Walls: He engineered the iconic Walakulu Bamma (Cloud Wall) and the Diyarella Bemma (Wave Wall) that line the lake and temple premises, defining the iconic perimeter of Kandy. [1, 2]

The Tragedy of a Master Artificer

Despite his genius, historical accounts highlight a tragic end driven by court intrigue. Slandered by jealous rivals, Moolacharya faced severe punishment or humiliation on the orders of the king. Overwhelmed by shame, he ultimately took his own life by drowning in the very lake he created. In remorse, King Sri Wickrema Rajasinghe ordered a funeral with royal honors and reportedly placed a commemorative plaque on the lake’s small island, though it has since disappeared. [1, 2, 3]

Modern Recognition and Legacy

While Moolacharya’s structures are globally celebrated as UNESCO World Heritage sites, public memory of the architect himself has faded over time. However, efforts to restore his memory are growing:

• Biographical Research: Comprehensive studies, such as D.D.M. Waidyasekera’s book, Great Royal Artificer of the Kandyan Kingdom- Devendra Mulachari, formally chronicle his engineering feats. [1]
• Exhibitions: An intricate scale model of his masterpiece, the Pathirippuwa, is displayed at the restored Ehelepola Walawwa in Kandy to educate visitors on his precision craftsmanship.
• Artifacts: His personal riyandanda (the traditional cubit measuring stick used for his architecture) is preserved for public viewing inside the Kandy National Museum. [1]

If you are researching his work or advocating for formal state honors, would you like to explore specific architectural details of his wooden carvings, or look into historical records regarding his descendants in Embekke?

https://share.google/aimode/qMusCZln6Wyx7I44T

Courtesy: AI Overview

…………………….

see also

Devendra Moolachari, the legendary master artificer who served under three Kandyan kings , undeniably shaped the architectural identity of Kandy . His remarkable vision—including the Paththirippuwa, Magul Maduwa, and Kandy Lake—deserves formal state honours and enduring national recognition for his unparalleled legacy. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Masterpieces of Devendra Moolachari

Moolachari (also known as Dingittha Appu) elevated the hill capital’s aesthetic, seamlessly blending utility, spirituality, and royal authority: [1, 2]

• Paththirippuwa (The Octagonal Pavilion): Built in 1802 , this iconic structure at the Sri Dalada Maligawa is celebrated for its steep, tiered roof and octagonal geometry . It was originally designed to allow the king to address his subjects and remains the defining symbol of the Temple of the Tooth .
• Magul Maduwa (Audience Hall): An architectural marvel of Kandyan timber engineering , characterized by its intricately carved wooden pillars that supported the royal court. [1, 2, 3]
• Kandy Lake (Kiri Muhuda): Constructed in 1807 , this man-made marvel visually and environmentally transformed the heart of the city into a scenic, tranquil landscape .
• Walakulu Bamma (Cloud Wall): The beautifully designed protective wall that famously surrounds the Maligawa and its moat.

The Need for State Recognition

While millions of visitors admire his work each year , the man behind these UNESCO World Heritage Site monuments has largely faded from public consciousness . Celebrating Moolachari with a national monument, formal historical inclusion, or state accolades would rectify a long-overdue gap in Sri Lankan cultural history, ensuring traditional artists receive the respect they are owed. [1]

Further Exploration: Architectural Masterpieces

• Learn about the historical significance of the landmark from the Wikipedia Paththirippuwa Page.
• View original reporting on his historical legacy in the Sunday Times Article.
• Read the architectural highlights in the AmazingLanka Audience Hall Guide.

Would you like to discuss Moolachari’s specific design techniques, or perhaps learn more about the locations in Kandy where his descendants can still be found today?

https://share.google/aimode/CL6HReI7U1g6HvPpW

AI OVERVIEW

By Rajendra Bandara – Saturday Magazine Island Mar 23 2002

http://www.worldgenweb.org/lkawgw/sinhalaartists.html

On the advice of Rev. Weliwita Sangaraja Saranankara, King Keerthi Sri Rajasinghe rebuilt and renovated hundreds of Buddhist temples which were destroyed by invaders or abandoned. For the restoration works, the King employed traditional Sinhala artists who were scattered throughout the country. These artists belonged to the artist caste called “Hiththaru”. This caste is also known as ‘Acharis’, ‘Nawandanna’, ‘Galladdo’, or ‘Gurunnanses’. In the Kandyan region they are regarded as high caste people, second only to the Govi caste.

Members of this caste use surnames “Naide” for males and “Nachchire” for females. Most of the names are of Indian origin as some craftsmen and artists migrated to Sri Lanka recently. “Naide” is similar to the Telengu word ‘Naidu’ used in ‘Andra Pradesh’ in Southern India. Females of this caste are allowed to wear Kandyan ‘Osariya’ as a special priviledge.

There were different schools of artists or generations, called “Paramparawa”. “Nilagama paramparawa” (school) is one of the most famous tradition. The well-known Dambulla rock temple was built by the “Acharis” of Nilagama tradition. The Head Craftsman or the Artist is called “Mulachari”. Under a Mulachari several assistants were employed.

Rev. Dewaragampola Silwaththena was a Buddhist Bhikku turned artist who painted the murals at “Ridivihara” and “Degaldoruwa”. Rev. Wettewe and Rev. Katuwana were the other monks who painted temple murals in this period. Dingiran Appu of Ahangama and Welitara Heenappu were famous artists in the Matara area. One still finds traditional artists in this area with family names of Devendra and Devasurendra.

Deldeniye Siththara Naide, Bodhinarayana Chithracharige Kapuru Naide, Wijayapala Muhandiram Neththa Naide and Hiriyale Naide were also famous traditional artists at that time.

Devendra Mulachari was the Head Craftsman of the King Sri Wickrema Rajasinghe, the last King of Sinhale. He was the creator of Paththiruppuwa of Sri Dalada Maligawa and the beautiful Kandy Lake. The descendents of this Mulachari are still found in the Kandy area and they are using the family name “Rankoth Vibhushana Gedera”.

After the completion of a Temple or a Devale the artists were given titles and gifts including lands. Some artists were given “Nalal Pata” (Jewelled ornament worn on the forehead) with a special title in appreciation of their skill. Some were elevated to the high caste by a proclamation made by the King.

It is mentioned in the “Dambulla Gal Sannasa” (Rockedict) that King Wimaldharmasuriya II, upon the occasion of fixing a bell on the rock in front of Raja Mahawihara at Dambulla, the craftsmen were rewarded with one amuna of paddy land (approx. 2 acres) and 200 fanams.

After the advent of western art, the Kandiyan art tradition was ignored and neglected. Descendents of the Kandyan artists are no more interested in preserving this unique style of painting.

Courtesy:  Saturday Magazine Island Mar 23 2002

DARK ROOM ඩාක් රූම්

Hiru News

When money goes missing from a wardrobe at home, the person in charge knows about it, so when money goes missing from a bank, don’t the bank officers assigned to it know, Colombo Chief Magistrate Asanga S Bodaragama questioned in court.

The Magistrate made these remarks when the case regarding the fraud of over 13 billion rupees through a general ledger account of a private bank was called.

The four suspects relevant to this incident were ordered to be remanded further until the 10th of next month by the Magistrate.

The fifth suspect in the incident was released on bail.

The Criminal Investigation Department, presenting further facts to the court regarding the incident, stated that the suspects should be remanded as investigations into this money racket are ongoing.

The lawyer appearing for the private bank stated that the bank suffered a loss of 13.9 billion rupees due to this money fraud.

At that moment, the Magistrate questioned the lawyer appearing for the bank.

“Didn’t the audit reports conducted in the bank during the 2023/2024 period reveal such an outflow of money from the bank? Has it been revealed that money in the general ledger account of the bank was taken by a certain party, used for another investment, and deposited back into the general ledger of the bank by someone inside the bank?”

The lawyer then stated that no such revelation occurred.

The Magistrate stated:

“It is mentioned that the 380 million rupees said to have been transferred lastly, was transferred on the exact same day. So, did such a large amount of money not transfer like this before? Wasn’t there an audit cycle system regarding that? Because when money drops in a home wardrobe, the person in charge at home knows it. When money increases in the bank’s general ledger account, don’t the officers coming for that know? When money goes missing, the owner must know. That process exists, but it did not operate in the bank.”

The Criminal Investigation Department presented facts to the court stating that investigations are being conducted regarding another 19 accounts related to the incident. Furthermore, investigations are underway regarding money that went abroad through suspense accounts, and the officers involved in it are also being investigated.

The Computer Crimes Investigation Unit of the Criminal Investigation Department informed the Colombo Chief Magistrate during the previous court session that there are no audit reports related to the sector in question within the internal and external audit reports conducted at the bank.

The Computer Crimes Investigation Unit informed the court on the previous trial date that no audits of the relevant payment and settlement sector were included in the internal and external audits conducted by the bank, or even in the audit reports conducted by the Central Bank of Sri Lanka.

The Magistrate ordered the progress of the investigations related to the incident to be presented to the court on the next trial date.

The case related to the incident is scheduled to be called on the 10th of next month.

SL Leaders

e-Con e-News

Posted byee ink.June 27, 2026Posted inUncategorizedTags:China, history, India, migration, news, politics

blog: https://eesrilanka.wordpress.com

‘Before you study the economics, study the economists!’

e-Con e-News 21-27 June 2026

The European Union (EU) has been operating a giant human trafficking network, buying & selling workers around the world, including from Sri Lanka. Not only is the EU involved, but the governments of Anglo North America (the USA & Canada) thrive & revel in these practices as well. For instance, during the 30-year war on Sri Lanka, these governments used their diplomatic – as well as NGO – channels to cherry-pick skilled workers & ‘professionals’ from refugee camps. Local politicians, north & south, also indulged in such lucrative ‘refugee’ games. Many of their major ‘recruiters’ in the camps ended up as ‘ethnic leaders’, involved in ‘settlement & adaptation’, becoming lawyers & even MPs representing ‘Diaspora’ communities, promoting war to generate even more refugees. Most workers suffered more mundane fates.

     This ee glances at the EU’s migration trade. It’s hard not to recall that the largest commerce before England’s opium ‘triangle’ trade from India to China, was the widespread European trading of the enslaved, ‘graduating’ from chattel to indentured to wage labor. The silencing echoes in thunder. The international trade in human labor, midst the domestic human resource biz, is even more pernicious & lucrative than the drug trade & weapons business, even as they are all intimately linked. There is very little analysis of this trade, even in so-called ‘liberal’ publications, perhaps due to their constituencies (social workers, teachers, lawyers, etc.) benefiting from this traffic. Limited exposure of this desperate world is then left to sensationalist tabloids & fascists.

     This ee Focus adapts an interview about the lives of Sri Lankans in Romania. Many Sri Lankans are, legally & illegally squirreled to Romania, many with the promise of eventual settlement in Western Europe. Insight News’ Shihar Aneez notes:

‘Romania has become one of the fastest-growing destinations

for Sri Lankan migrant workers seeking opportunities in Europe.

But behind the promise of better jobs & higher wages,

some workers report a very different reality.’

*

Aneez interviews Romanian researcher Iulia Hau who points to what she claims is a ‘cultural blind spot’ which assumes Europeans do no harm. Media instead blame Sri Lankan ‘agents’ for the horrors migrant workers end up enduring in Europe and elsewhere. She describes how ‘Romania has become a gateway to Europe, how migration networks operate.’ Aneez’s extensive interview covers ‘recruitment practices, migration costs, labor exploitation, human trafficking investigations, unpaid wages, workplace safety concerns, legal challenges, and the difficulties many workers face when seeking justice… and what prospective workers should know before making the journey.’

     What is excluded however is the ‘larger picture’. This week, we heard that Israel is blocking remittances by over 5,000 Sri Lankan workers amounting to almost $7million. The Israeli government has frozen the funds of the money transfer business, Global Remit Currency Services, which is accused of money laundering. But there is very little news about what they did & the larger banking interests behind them. There was also ‘headline’ news that the Sri Lanka government has launched an ‘app to draw Lankan migrant workers’ complaints.’ When companies & government departments don’t even answer landlines let alone mobile phones, these proclamations about such ‘digitalization’ & other modern conveniences, AI, etc, are another sick joke. Even crazier is the threat by the National Chamber of Exporters (NCE)’s call ‘for a framework to recruit foreign workers’ (see ee Workers).

     Hau’s tale is important because the laws are inscribed in a Kafkaesque manner to create innumerable intermediaries – middlemen (& middlewomen!) both here and abroad. The European traders and bureaucrats who leverage this system are kept invisible. The process of Sri Lankan workers being recruited and trafficked appears haphazard and cruel, replete with tales of sexual abuse and fraud, despite the formal Bureau of Foreign Employment (SLBFE), and the 900 member agencies of the Association of Licensed Foreign Employment Agencies. Such tales are not only reserved for going to work in other countries, as in West Asia, but stories abound of the humiliation, sexual harassment & bribery practised by European & US & Canadian visa officials. So, whereas the migration process appears informal here, there is an overall method to the madness. While Sri Lankans are being hired to work in Romania, the rest of Europe is formally recruiting workers, through Romania (though, as with Sri Lanka, they’re taking advantage of both countries’ education & skills imparted by their now-derided socialist policies). And not just skilled workers.

     ee (18 April 2020) noted how England was importing Romanian workers to pluck fruit, through their Country Land & Business Association (CLBA), which represents rural landowners in England & Wales. The CLBA funds 100s of MPs in their ‘democratic’ parliament. Romanian workers were flown in by an unnamed food produce company, which chartered a plane booked by Air Charter Service (ACS). We even then wondered why the BBC story did not name the food company involved: ABF, Booker, Sainsbury, Tesco? Or mention the banks involved?  ee (25 April 2020) reported how Germany was planning to fly in 10,000s of eastern Europeans for harvesting – keeping the system of seasonal work alive despite Covid 19. Incoming Romanians were welcomed with ‘chocolate Easter bunnies’ by the German agricultural minister. In Austria, carers and agricultural workers were flown in from Bulgaria, Croatia & Romania. Yet 2 years before that the Austrian government had reduced family allowance of Eastern European workers. By 2020 even bonus payments were given to care-workers to make them stay longer!

     The blocking of Sri Lankans’ remittances is not as unorganized as it was made out to be in 2022. What is lacking in the scholarship of our well-funded social scientists is the linking of this trade to the labor policies of the humongous multinational corporations (MNCs), confederations of industries and federations of ‘small business’, chambers of commerce, employers’ federations etc, and major recruitment organizations that specialize in sourcing and relocating workers. It is no surprise that while there are ‘world governing bodies such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) to oversee trade, there is no such body to monitor migration. In the USA & Canada, priority is given to temporary migrants, siphoned to farm work & ‘care’. Such workers are prevented from joining unions, and lack their own health and social benefits. All the blather about ‘building walls’ & ’deportation’ only take place after harvests in the autumn, and seasonal wages come due to be paid. All blather of human rights excludes the right to decent work, and to develop our countries.

     In Sri Lanka, workers’ remittances are the largest source of foreign exchange, even if such value is not appreciated at points of entry & exit. Migrant labor is also used for ‘integrating’ our economies with other countries, creating further dependencies, like market access for import-heavy exports.

     The Philippines is supposed to be the largest labour exporting country in Asia. Yet, despite the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD) shilling about such labor movements enabling technology transfer & upskilling, it has not developed their country, only creating greater dependency. During the Covid pandemic more Filipina nurses died inside the USA than inside the Philippines.

*

• This week also saw the entry into Sri Lanka, of more US war-makers & related officials, bearing explosive gifts, demanding Sri Lanka become a base for them to harass our neighbors, monitoring ‘sanctioned vessels’, etc (see ee Quotes, Kapur, Schneider). It is no coincidence that they were followed by the IMF, World Bank, etc, offering yet-to-be-seen billions in aid etc, which might follow if only we fulfil their demands. The World Bank tell us (or warns) that 1 million young Sri Lankans are about to enter the labour force, and their ‘repayable’ dollars are to assist the private sector to employ workers.

     This week also saw another revelation of millions & billions defrauded from the country, involving mis-invoicing, under- & over -invoicing, etc. It is no surprise that the merchant media fails to even hint that the larger defalcations are legally committed by multinational corporations. Some media do point out that it was the JVP-supported Foreign Exchange Act of 2017 that removed the Exchange Control Act of 1953, that ‘under the pretext of liberalising the foreign currency flow, converted non-bailable criminal offences into civil offences’ (see Random Notes).

     Meanwhile, the Business news is full of the philanthropy – private corporations donating this medical item & building this or that part of a school, etc – without mentioning who is going to sustain such largesse. These do-good acts often act as preludes to the privatization of health & education.

*

‘It is wrong to blame governments alone for poor economic growth, as many do.

Most economic activity in this country is run by the private sector

& leaders there have made poor use of opportunities.’ – Usvatte-Aratchi

• One economist lamented this week, that despite Sri Lanka apparently following all the rules demanded by the IMF etc, nothing seems to protect us. They also note that the USA & EU’s perpetual resort to war is not a part of these analysts’ ‘planning scenarios’ & growth projections. Our policymakers seem to close their eyes & ears & noses to such first & last resorts. Some speak of our primary need for ensuring energy security, but do not recall the story of DJ Wimalasurendra, let alone the long trail of sabotage of progressive industrial policies:

‘For quite some time, there has been no agency of government

dealing with long-term economic & social policy questions.

Nor have universities been of any help.’ – Usvatte-Aratchi

*

This ee Focus reproduces Usvatte-Aratchi’s survey of the, perhaps-feeble, attempts to plan the economy, as well as the eminent personages who have sought since 1948 to steer Sri Lanka’s economy. He even mentions SBD de Silva! He deems ‘mysterious’, why the present government has seen no need for specialist advisors. He even lists famed Indian economists. Though he too ‘mysteriously’ misses out on naming the Indian statistician Prasanta Chandra Mahalanobis whose first two 5-year plans inspired many countries after WW2. Despite relentless attacks, led by US-paid economic hitmen, Mahalanobis’ plans laid the foundation for India’s heavy industry and set up the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT).

     Usvatte-Aratchi also feels a Central Bank can only resolve short-term problems. He praises Sri Lanka’s outstanding successes in mortality, in health & education (carried out by political leaders). He then points to the petty nature of our merchants, and asks: ‘Where are the large-scale manufacturing & service companies, selling the world over, where economies of scale abound in the 21st century?’ And he wonders why:

‘No multinational companies have

established here any large factories or offices.

Is the air we breathe deathly to enterprise?’

*

• The nature of the US-led white & honorary-white coalition may be gauged by this week’s announcement by the US government of the resignation of England’s Prime Minister, even before the English leader (their 6^th PM to quit in 10 years) himself declared his exit. Brexit indeed!

‘Politics is a concentrated expression of economics…

The military function is the essential

expression of this political concentration…

– Hyper-Imperialism: A Dangerous Decadent New Stage

Their news is full of headlines about ceasefires & prayers, for peace to be prolonged. Many podcasts are exaggerating tactical battlefield victories, rather than soberly assessing the imperialist penchant for strategic permanent war. The media is full of awe for the white settler states, alternating between awe and revulsion. Yet anyone who knows US & white settler history, knows full well their genocidal practices, and what has actually defeated them. Having now been ‘tactically’ thwarted in parts of West Asia, does not mean the US & EU have suddenly been seized by an attack of peaceability. We fear the US-led European (& Japanese) war machine will next turn their guns on Cuba, as well as China. The current nature of the ‘hyperimperialism’ endangering the world is fully detailed in this ee Focus’ 6^th excerpt of the (TI) Tricontinental Institute’s pathbreaking investigation:

‘During its history England’s forces (or forces

with an English mandate) have invaded, had

some control over, or fought conflicts in 171

of the world’s 193 countries that are currently

UN member states, or 9 out of 10 of all countries.’

*

TI describes the organization of the Global North (GN) arrayed against the world, their umbilical links to the USA & its intelligence services, and tabulates the numbers & types of wars they have waged. Most important is its analysis of the special relationship between the USA & Israel. The USA itself ‘was established by white, religious extremists who, in 1690, conceived and established their colonial settlements as ‘plantations of religion’. It is also clear that: ‘Israel was the creation of English & US imperialism’. (see ee Focus)

*

The production of and trade in plantation crops

were determined by trading monopolies

consisting of agency houses, brokers, shippers &

the marketing combines in the metropolitan countries.

*

• How these monopoly interests extended their power over plantation economies have been a vital component of SBD de Silva’s classic The Political Economy of Underdevelopment. This ee Focus continues Chapter 11 where he shows the influence of these monopolies on the technological & marketing strategies of plantations. He shows they preferred to ‘maximize gross revenue instead of minimizing production costs’. He focuses on why this method of producing tea in plantations saw no need to modernize technology or advance workers’ skills. This has had a deadly stranglehold on the upgrading of ‘human resources’ in Sri Lanka.

     The resort to any innovative technology was usually due to great external pressures such as wartime shortages and competition, for example, the resort to synthetic over natural rubber, beet sugar over cane. SBD gives numerous examples from around the world, why colonial policy favored higher prices over more efficient production. Another dampener to innovation was the relationship between the managing agency firms and the plantations, and its impact on technology. Since payments to the agency were usually paid on a profits basis, plantations kept wage rates as low as possible, therefore preferring labour intensity, so technological changes were of no interest to the agency.

     It is worth recalling once again SBD de Silva’s insight into the differences between industrial producer capital, and merchant capital, which depends on privileged access to the state and physical violence. It is time to expose the corruption of the constant cry about corruption by a media that is the epitome of merchant corruption. We are a country ruled by importers of other countries’ industrial goods, and ruled by importers disguised as exporters. We have to endure the sermons of economists who import their ideas from our imperialist masters, always crying about the need for more exports which are actually made of even more imports. Such is the comedy that turns us into exporters of our greatest resource: the fruit of our land and labor.

*

_________

Contents:

The European Union’s Deadly Migration Game

ආචාර්ය සුදත් ගුණසේකර අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය සිරිමාවෝ බණ්ඩාරනායක මැතිනියගේ හිටපු ස්ථිර ලේකම් සහ ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලනසේවා සන්ගමයේ සභාපති (1991-94))

මේ රටේ පලාත්සභා ඡන්දය වහාම පවත්වන්මෙන් කෑමොර දෙන දේශපාලකයින් ඇතුලු සියලුම පිස්සන් ජීවිතාන්තය දක්වා යැවිය යුත්තේ අන්ගොඩටය, එසේත් නැතිනම් ඔවුන් දේශද්‍රෝහීන්, ජාතිද්‍රෝහීන් සහ බෞද්ධ විරෝධීන් වශයෙන් වහාම මේ පින් බිමෙන් යළි කිසිදාක ආපසු ආ නොහැකි පිට සක්වලකටම පිටුවහල් කළ යුතුය.

1V වන කොටස

1987 රජිව් ගාන්ධි/ජේ. ආර්. ඉන්දු ලන්කා ගිවිසුමෙන් ඇතිවූ ශ්‍රී ලන්කා දේශපාලන ඉතිහාශයේ කළු ලප.

ඉන්දු ලන්කා ගිවිසුම අත්සන් කිරීමට පෙර ඉන්දියාව සියළුම පිළිගත් ජාත්‍යන්තර නීතිවලට පටහැනිව,1987 ජූනි 4 වන දින පළමුව ඉන්දීය මිරාජ් 2000 ප්‍රහාරක ජෙට් යානා 4 ක ආරක්ශාව ඇතිව ඒණ්-32 ට්රන්ස්පොර්ට් ගුවන් යානා 5 ක්, ලන්කා රාජ්‍ය ආක්‍රමණයකොට ගුවනින් ‘පරිප්පු දමා, පාලකයින් මරණ බියෙන් බියගන්වා, පළමුව ඉන්දු- ලන්කා ගිවිසුම අත්සන් කිරීමට පසුබිම සකස්කොට, දෙවණුව, 1987 ජූලි 29 වන දින රජිව් ගාන්ධි/ජේ ආර් ලවා එම ගිවිසුම අත්සන්කොට බලහත්කාරයෙන් අප හිස මත පටවන ලදී.

මෙම ගිවිසුමට එරෙහිව සියළුම විපක්ෂ ඒකාභද්ධව පිට කොටුවේ දැවැන්ත මහජන විරෝධතාවක්ද පැවැත්විය.එසේම ඊට එරෙහිව දිවයින පුරා පැවති විරෝධතා වලින් පුද්ගලයින් 147 දෙනකු ජීවිත පූජා කලහ. මෙදින සිදුවූ අති විසේෂම සිද්ධිය වූයේ මෙම ඉන්දීය ආක්‍රමණයට විරෝධය පෑමක් වශයෙන්, රජිව් ගාන්දි වෙනුවෙන් කොටුවේ පවත්වනලද ආචාර පෙලපාලියේදී, ලන්කා ඉතිහාශයට එක්වූ එක් වීර සින්හල දේශප්‍රේමියෙක් වූ නාවික සෙබල විජේමුනි රෝහණ ද සිල්වා විසින්, එම ඉන්දීය ආක්රමණයට ජාතියේ විරෝධය පෑමක් වශයෙන් ඔහු අත තිබුණු තුවක්කු බඳයෙන් රජිව් ගාන්දිට පහර දිමය.

කෙසේ වුවද 1987 ජූලි 29 වන දින ජේ.ආර් ජයවර්ධන ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ රජය, දිවයින පුරා හදිසි නීතිය සහ ඇඳිරි නීතිය පනවා, ඒ යටතේ ඉන්දියාව විසින් බලහත්කාරයෙන් අප රට මත පැටවු රජිව් ගාන්ධි/ජේ. ආර්.  ඉන්දු- ලන්කා ගිවිසුම අත්සන් කළේ මෙවැනි පසු බිමකය. එහි ප්‍රධාන අරමුණු වූයේ 1) එවකට පැවති ත්‍රස්ථවාදි යුද්ධය නතරකිරීම 2) එල් ට්. ට්ය නිරායුධ කිරිම සහ 3) උතුරු නැගෙනහිර පලාත් ඒකාභද්ධ කොට ඊට ස්වයන් පාලනය ලබා දීමය.

 මේ සඳහා 1987 අන්ක 42 පලාත් සභා පනතින් අවශ්‍ය බලතල සම්පාධනය කිරීම සහ ඒ සඳහා අවශ්‍ය ව්යුහාත්මක, නයිතික සහ පරිපාලන වෙනස්කම් පිලිබඳ යෝජනාද ඉදිරිපත් කෙරින. ඒ සමඟම රජයේ හමුදා බැරක්ක වලට සීමාකිරිමට සහ එල්. ටී.ටි. ආයුධ ඉන්දීය සාම හමුදාවට භාරදීමටද නියමිතව තිබින. මෙම පනතේ සියළු විධිවිධාන සකස්කළේ ඉන්දියාවට අවශ්‍ය අන්දමටය.රජයේ හමුදා බැරැක්ක වලට ගියද එල්. ටී.ටිය ඔවුන්ගේ ආයුධ සියල්ලම භාර නොදුන් අතර ගිවිසුමද උල්ලන්ඝනය කොට නැවතත් සටනට අවතීරණය වීය. ඉන්දියාව ඊට කිසිදු ප්‍රතිචාරයක් නොදැක්වූ අතර එල්. ටී.ටිය සම්පූර්නයෙන්ම නිරායුධ නොකළ නිසා ඉන්දියාව විසින්ම ගිවිසුම උල්ලන්ඝණය කොට ඇත. 

 ගිවිසුමේ ප්‍රධාන අරමුණු3න් 1 සා 2 ම ඉටුවුයේ නැත. අන්ක 3 අනුව උ.සහ නැ පලාත් දෙක ඒකාබද්ද කලද එයත් ජ්.ව්.පි. ගොණුකළ නඩුවකින් නැවත විසුරුවා හැරීමට සිදු විය. එසේම ඉඩම්, අධිකරණ සහ පොලිස් බලතලද එම පලාත් දෙකට ලබා දුන්නේ නැත.මේ අනුව ඇත්ත වශයෙන්ම එම ගිවිසුම අහෝසී වී දැන් බෝහෝ කල්ය.

අනෙත් අතින් එම ගිවිසුමට පෙර ඉන්දියාව පුරා එල්. ටී.ටි යට ඉන්දියාව විසින් යුධ පුහුණුව ලබාදීම, මුදල් ලබාදීම, අවිආයුධ සහ යුධ ශිල්පය පිළිබඳ අවශ්‍ය දැණුම අතුලු සියලු පහසුකම් සැපයීම පමණක් නොව අවසානයේදී රජිව් ගාන්ධිගේ වෙඩි නොවදින කබාය පවා ඔහු අතින්ම දකුණු ඉන්දියාවේ පැවති ප්‍රසිද්ධ සභාවකදීම ප්‍රභාකරන්ට සියතින්ම ප්‍රදානය කිරීම වැනි සියළු යුධ ආධාර  එල්. ටී.ටි යට ලබාදීම නිසා ඉන්දියාව විසින්ම ඉන්දු-ලන්කා ගිවිසුම තව දුරටත් ඒකපාක්ශිකව උල්ලන්ඝනය කොට ඇති පසුබිමක එම ගිවිසුම අනුව ශ්‍රී ලන්කාව තවදුරටත් කටයුතු කිරීමේ කිසිදු අවශ්‍යතාවක්ද, නෛතික බැඳීමක්ද දැන් නැත.

1987 නොව් 14. 13 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම සන්ශෝධන පනත මෙන්ම 1987 අන්ක 42 පලාත් සභා පලාත් සභා පනතද පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙන් සම්මත කෙරින. ජේ.ආර්. ජනාධිපතිවරයා මෙම පනත් දෙකම පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙන් සම්මත කරගනු ලැබුයේ තම පක්ෂයේ සියලුම මන්ත්‍රී වරුන්ගෙන් දින නොමැති ඉල්ලා අස්වීමේ ලිපි ලබාගෙන ඔවුන් කොලඹ හෝටලයක සිරකොට තබාගෙන සිට චන්දය ප්‍රකාශකරන වෙලාවට පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ගෙන්වා ගෙනය. එහි සුවිශේෂී කරුණ්ක් වූයේ අගමැති ප්‍රේමදා, ගාමනි ජයසූරිය කෘශිකර්ම ඇමති සහ ලලිත් ඇතුලත්මුදලි ඇතුලුව තව කීප දෙනෙක් ද ගිවිසුමට අත්සන් නොකිරීමය. ජේ.ආර්ගේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ තිබුණ 3/5 බලය යොදාගෙන පලාත් සභා ක්‍රමය මේ රටට පස්චාත් 1948 යුගයේදී මේ රටේ දේශද්‍රෝහී ජාතිද්‍රෝහී එක් දේශ පාලකයෙකු තමන් සතු තාවකාලික දේශපාලන බලය, තම මව්බිම සහ ජාතිය    ඉන්දියාවට පාවාදුන් ප්‍රථම අව්ස්ථාව වශයෙන් එය ඉතිහාශයට එක්විය.

ඉන්දියාව විසින් ගිවිසුමෙන් යෝජනා කළේ උතුර සහ නැගෙනහිර එක්කොට නිර්මානය වන එක් පලාත්සභාවක් පමණි.එසේ කළේ ඊලම ප්‍රකාශකිරීමට ඉන්දියාවේ තිබුණ අවශ්‍ය පසුබිම නිර්මාණය කිරීම සඳහාය. එහෙත් එම පලාත්දෙක ලන්කා රාජ්‍යෙන් කැඩී වෙන්වීම වලක්වා ගැනිම සඳහා උපායක් වශයෙන් අනෙකුත් පලාත් සඳහාද ජේ. ආර්.පලාත් සභා පිහිටවූ බව ප්‍රකට රහසකි.එසේ කළේ අනෙක් පලාත් 7 තේද අනුමැතිය නැතිව රට බෙදිම අවහිර කිරීමට යැයි කියවේ.එය සත්‍යක් නම් ජේ ආර්ට අපි ප්‍රසන්ශා කළයුතුය.කෙසේ වුවද මෙම ගිවිසුම අත්සන් කිරීමට ඔහු දැරූ උත්සාහය සහ ඇප කැපවීම 1944 දී මේ රට ඉන්දියාවේ ප්‍රාන්තයක් වියයුතු බවට රාජ්‍ය සභාවේ ජේ. ආර්. කලේයයි කියන ප්‍රකාශය 1987 වනවිටත් ඔහුගේ හිසේ හොල්මන් කළාද යන සැකය මතුවෙයි.

කෙසේ වුවද 13 වන ව්‍යවස්ථා සන්ශෝධනය යටතේ ප්‍රථම වරට උතුර සහ නැගෙනහිර පලාත් දෙක ඒකාභද්ධ කොට මේ රටට ප්‍රථම වරට පලාත් සභා ක්‍රමය හඳුන්වා දෙන ලදී.මෙහි යටි අරමුණ වූයේ කොටින්ගේ මෙන්ම උ.නැ. පලාත් දෙකේ ජාතිවදී දෙමළ දේශපාලකයින්ගේ සිහිනයවූ ඊලම සඳහා අත්තිවාරම දැමීමය.කෙසේ වුවද ඉඩම් බලතල,පොලිස් බලත සහ අධිකරණ බලතල කිසිම පලාත් සභාවකට දුන්නේ නැත.

මේ අතර 1833 සිට මේ රටේ පැවති පලාත් සහ දිසා ඒකාභද්ධ පරිපාලනය 1955 අන්ක 22 දරන දිස්ත්‍රික් පරිපාලන ආඥා පනතින් දිස්ත්‍රික් කේන්ද්‍රගතව පැවති දිස්ත්‍රික් 20 සේ පාලනයද පලාත් සභා පනතින්ම, පලාත් 9 තුලට අනුගත කෙරින.මේ අනුව 1987 පලාත් සභා ක්‍රමය හඳුන්වා දීමත් සමගම සිදුවු ආණ්ඩුකාරයෙකු පත්කිරීම නිසා එතෙක් පැවැති දිසා පරිපාලනය තුල දිසාපාලනය පිළිබඳ ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් වරුන් සහ ග්‍රාම සේවා නිලධාරීන්ගේ පාලනයද එසේම සෙසු සියළු රජයේ දෙපාර්තමේන්තු නිලධාරීන් කෙරෙහි දිසාපති සතුව තිබුණු පරිපාලන සහ සම්භන්ධීකරණ බලතලද සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම බිඳවැටුණු බවද මෙහිදී සඳන් කළ යුතුය.

මේ අතර 13 වන සන්ශෝධනය යටතේ, 1992 අන්ක 58 දරන ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් කාර්‍යාලවලට බලය පැවරීමේ පනතින් එතෙක් දිසාව තුල, දිසාපති සතුව තිබුණු රජයේ ඉඩම් පිළිබඳ බලතළ ඇතුළු පරිපාලන බලතල සියල්ලම ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් කාර්‍යාල වලට පවරණ ලදී. ඒ යටතේ එතෙක් දිසාපතීන් යටතේ තිබුණු රජයේ ඉඩම් බලතල සියල්ලම ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් වරුන්ට පැවරීම නිසා, එතෙක් පලාත් සභාවන්ට නොදී තිබුණු රජයේ ඉඩම් බලතල නිරායාශයෙන්ම පලාත් සභාවලට ලැබින.ඒහෙත් ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් වරුන්ට ඒ පිළිබඳ පුහුණුවක් නොතිබුණු නිසාද, බොහෝ ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම්වරුන් කාන්තාවන් වීම සහ ක්ශේස්ත්‍රයේ රාජකාරි කාන්තාවන්ට අති දුෂ්කරවූ නිසාද, ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම්  කාර්‍යාලවලට මේ වනතුරුත් පලපුරුදු ඉඩම් නිලධාරීන් පත්කොට නැති නිසාද අද සමස්ත දිවයිනේම ඉඩම් රාජකාරි සිදුවන්නේ ඉතාමත් මන්දගාමීවය.

1992 අන්ක 58 පනතින් ප්‍රා ලේ වරුන්ට දී ඇති බලතල වඩාත්ම භයානක තත්වය වනුයේ උතුරු නැගෙනහිර සියලුම ඉඩම් බලතල එම පලාත් සභා වලට හිමිවීමය. ඒ සමඟම එම ප්‍රාදේශවල රජයේ ඉඩම් පිළිබඳ සියළුම බලතල එම පලාත් දෙකේ පලාත් සභාවලට සහ ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් වරුන් යටතට පත්වීම නිසා එහි රජ්යේ ඉඩම් පිලිබඳ පාලනය මධ්‍යම රජයේ පාලනයෙන් සම්පූර්ණයෙම ගිලිහී ගියේය.

ජේ ආර්. නොදී තිබුණු ඉඩම් බලතල මෙ අනුව ප්‍රේමදාස ජනාධිපති වරයා විසින් පලාත් සභාවලට දීමෙන් 1992 දී ඔහු ඊලමට දොරටුව විවුර්ථ කළේය. මෙය වූ කළී ප්‍රේමදාස ජනාධිපති වරයාගේද අන්ක එකේ මව්බිම පාවාදීමකි.මෙහි ඇති වඩාත්ම භයානකම දෙය වනුයේ මෙම පලාත්වල ඇති සියළුම රජයේ ඉඩම් බදු දීම, සින්නකර දීම ආදි සියළුම බලතල භාර නිළධාරීන් වන ග්‍රාම සේවකගේ සිට පලාත් ඉඩම් කොමසාරිස් දක්වා සියළුම රජයේ නිළධාරින් මෙන්ම, ප්‍රාදේශිය සහ පලාත් මට්ටමේ සියළුම මහජන නියෝජිතයින් සහ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී වරුන්, ආණ්ඩුකාරයින් යන සියලුම දෙනාද දෙමළ වීමය.එසේම මේ සියලුම දේශපාලකයින්ද දෙමළ වීමය. මේ අනුව ඉහත උක්ත පනතින් මෙන්ම චක්‍ර ලේඛයෙන්ද ඉතා පැහැදිළිවම සිදුකොට ඇත්තේ ඊලමට දොර විවුර්ථ කිරීමක් මෙන්ම රට දෙකට කැඩීමට පාර විවුර්ථකොට දීම නොවේද. එමෙම අභාග්‍යසම්පන්න තත්වයට සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම වගකිවයුත්තේ, රට ජාතිය ගැන නොසිතා, චන්දය ගැන පමණක් සිතා,  ජාති ද්‍රෝහී, දේශද්‍රෝහී අන්දමින් මෙම තිරණ දෙක ගත් ප්‍රේමදාස ජනාධිපති වරයා නොවේද.

1992 නිකුත් කරණ ළද 58 පනත මෙන්ම රා.ප.පා චක්‍රලෙඛ 21 නිකුත් කළ, මේ රටේ  රාජ්‍ය සේවය කියන්නේ කුමදැයි නොදත් අමාත්‍යාංශ ලේකම්වරයාද මේ ජාතික අපරාධයට වගකිව යුතුය. එන්. කියු. දියෙස් (ශ්‍රී ලන්කාවේ කෞටිල්‍ය), නෙවිල් ජයවීර සහ ඩබ්ලිව්.ටී.ජයසින්හ වැනි සිවිල් සේවකයින්, ඊට පසු යුගයේ නොසිටීම කොතරම් පාඩුවක් දැයි දැන් මට සිතේ.

මේ අතර 1992, 58 පනතින් ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් කාර්‍යාලව ප්‍රධානීන් වශයෙන් ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවයේ 1 මු පන්තියේ නිළධාරීන් පත්කිරීමට තීරණය කළද  ප්‍රාදේශ 345 ක් පමණ වූ සියළුම ප්‍රාදේශීය කාර්‍යාල වලට ශ්‍රි ලන්. ප.සේ. 1 පන්තියේ නිළධාරින් නොසිටි නිසා ඌණපූරණය සඳහා සමාන්තර සේවා නමින් හැඳින්වෙන ඉන්ජිනේරු, ගණකාධිකාරි, සැළසුම් වැනි සේවාවල 1 පන්තියේ නිළධාරීන්ද ප්‍රාදේශිය ලේකම් වරුන් වශයෙන් පත්කිරීමටද රජය තීරණය කළේය.ඊටම සමගාමීව සියළුම ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම්වරුන් ප්‍රාදේශීය සභාවල සභාපතිවරුන්ගේ ලේකම්වරුන් වශයෙන් පත්කිරීමටද ප්‍රේමදාස ජනාධිපතිවරයා තීරනය කලේය.එතෙක් ප්‍රාදේශීය සභා වල ලේකම් වරුන් වශයෙන් කටයුතු  කලේ අපොස සාමන්‍යපෙල සමත් පලාත් පාලන සේවයේ ලිපිකරුවන්ය.

ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවයේ වාසනාවටමෙන් එවකට ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවා සන්ගමයේ සභාපති වශයෙන් සිටියේ මාය. රජයේ මෙම නව වැඩ පිලිවෙල නිසා මේ රටේ ප්‍රශස්ථ පරිපාලන සේවය කඩා වැටී, දිසා සහ ප්‍රාදේශීය පරිපාලනය සම්පූර්ණයෙනම් අවුල්වී, ශ්‍රී, ලන්.පසේ  කඩාවැටී එය යළි කිසිදිනක ගොඩ ගැනීමට නොහැකි තත්වයකට පත්ව, ශ්‍රී ලන්කාවේ සමස්ථ පරිපාලනයම කඩා වැටීමේ දැඩි අර්බුධයකට ලක්වන බැවින්,   රටේ  යහපාලනය මෙන්ම රටතුල සිදු කෙරෙන රාජ්‍ය වගකීම් වන පාලනය,සන්වර්ධනය මෙන්ම    සියළුම මහජන සේවාවන් කඩා වැටෙන බවද මා දුටිමි. ශ්‍රී ලන්.ප.පා සේවයේ මෙන්ම රටේ දිසා සහ උප දිසා  සේවයේ වාසනාවකට මෙන් ඒ වනවිට ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවා සන්ගමයේ සභාපති වශයෙන් සිටියේ මාය.

මෙම තොරතුර මා අතට පත්වූ විගසම සන්ගමයේ හදිසි රැස්වීමක් කැඳවා එහි මුලසුනට ප්‍රේමදාස ජනාධිපතිවරයා ගෙන්වාගෙන මවිසින් ඊට එරෙහිව සහේතුකව කරුණු දක්වීමෙන් පසු මගේ විරෝධය පිළිගත් ජනාධිපතිවරයා එම තීරනය වෙනස් කලේය. ඒ අනුව ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවය එදා මරනින් බේරාගැනීමට මට හැකිවීම ගැන මම අදටත් නිහතමානීව ආඩම්බර වෙමි. එසේම ප්‍රේමදාස වැනි දැඩි මථධාරි රාජ්‍යනායකයෙකුගේ එම අධූරදර්ෂී තීරණය, රටේ සමsථ අභ්‍යන්තර පරිපාලනයටම  සිදු වීමට ගිය අති විශාල අර්භුධයකින් රට ජාතිය බේරා ගැනීම හා ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවයේ ආරක්ෂාව වෙනුවෙන් බෙල්ල දී වෙනස් කිරීමට තරම් චිත්ත ධෛහිර්ය හා ජාන ලබා දුන් මගේ දෙමව්පියන්ට මෙන්ම ශිප්සතර උගැන්වූ ගුරුදෙවිවරුන්ටද මම නිහතමානීව අදටත් පින් දෙමි. 

මගේ කෙටි කථාව අවසන් කොට ඔහු අසලම වේදිකාවේ අසුනේ වාඩි වීමත් සමඟම, ඔහු පිළිගත් මොහොතේ සිට එතෙක් වචනයක්වත් මා සමඟ නොදෙඩු ඔහු මා දෙසට හැරී ‘Sudath you made an excellent speech, my congratulations” කීවේය. අනතුරුව ඔහුගේ කතාවේදී, මා සඳහන් කළ භයානක තත්වය ගැන කිසිවක් ඒ වනතුරුම ඔහු නොදැන සිටි බවද නිහතමානිව පිලිගනිමින් මේ රටේ රාජ්‍යපරිපාලනයට සිදු වීමට ගිය එම භයානක තත්වය පෙන්වාදීම ගැන මට සහ අප සන්ගමයටද බෙහෙවින් ස්තුති කළේය. ඒ සමඟම ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවයේ යහපත සහ ආරක්ෂාව වෙනුවෙන් මවිසින් ඉල්ලා සිටිනලද ‘ශ්‍රී ලන්කා පරිපාලන සේවයේ ලේඛණගත කිසිම තනතුරක්ට වෙනත් කිසිම සේවයක නිලධාරියෙකු පත් නොකරණ මෙන්” කළ මගේ එම ඉල්ලීම අතුලු ඉල්ලීම් සියල්ලම ලබාදීමට ඔහු පොරොන්දු විය.

 ඒ වනවිටත් සන්චිතයේ සිටි මා, පසුදින සිටම සෞක්‍ය අමාත්‍යාන්ශයේ රාජ්‍ය ලේකම් වශයෙන් පත්කිරිමෙන්ම ඔහු එදා මගේ කතාව ගැන කොතරම් සතුටු වීදැයි ඔබට සිතාගත හැක.

මෙම සිද්ධිය මෙම ලිපියේ මාතෘකාවට රිජුවම අදාල නැතත් එය මෙහි සන්ඳහන් කලේ රාජ්‍යසේවකයින් වශයෙන්, අප කරන, කියන කුමක් වුවත් නිර්භයව, එඩිතරව තම උපන් දේශයේ සහ පොදුජන  යහපත පමණක් සලකා කළයුතු බව පෙන්වා දීමටය. 

එදා එම උතුම් පොදු අරමුණු ගැන පමණක් සිතා මගේ බෙල්ල දී ශ්‍රි ල.ප.සේ. මරණින් බේරාගැනිමට මට හැකිවිය.

එසේම 1992 අන්ක 58 පනත සහ රා.පරි.පා 21 චක ලේඛය ගැනද කිසිවෙකු මා දැනුවත් කළේ නම් ඒ දෙකද ක්‍රියාත්මක වීම වහාම නතර  කර ගැනීමට මට හැකියාව තිබිණ.රටේ අවාසනාවට මෙන් ඒ මොහොතේ මා ඒ ගැන දැන සිටියේ නැත.

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

https://www.sundayobserver.lk/2026/06/28/business/79914/can-sri-lanka-afford-to-wait-for-trincomalee-port-development

Critical overview 

Trincomalee Must Become Sri Lanka’s Offshore Industry Capital – Not Just Another Commercial Port
The current debate on Trincomalee Port development has largely centred on logistics, container handling, oil storage, industrial zones, and real estate. While these sectors are important, they alone will not maximise the strategic and economic value of one of the world’s finest natural harbours.
Sri Lanka should adopt a broader vision by developing Trincomalee as a regional offshore engineering, ship repair, and floating energy infrastructure hub.
A Multi-Billion Dollar Global Industry
Across the world, hundreds of offshore assets require periodic maintenance, conversion, and upgrading. These include:
● Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessels
● Floating Storage and Regasification Units (FSRU)
● Offshore drilling rigs
● Production platforms
● Offshore support vessels
● Large crude oil tankers requiring life extension
● Wind farm installation vessels
Many ageing Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCCs) and Ultra Large Crude Carriers can be economically converted into FPSOs instead of being scrapped. Such conversions generate contract values ranging from several hundred million to over a billion US dollars depending on the scope.
Why Trincomalee?
Unlike constructing an entirely new shipyard, many offshore repair and conversion activities can initially be undertaken using:
● Deep natural anchorage
● Floating docks
● Heavy lift barges
● Modular fabrication yards
● Existing oil tank facilities
● Temporary construction berths
This significantly reduces capital investment while allowing operations to commence much earlier.
Skilled Employment
One FPSO conversion project employs thousands of personnel, including:
● Naval architects
● Marine engineers
● Welders
● Pipe fabricators
● Electricians
● Instrument technicians
● NDT inspectors
● Coating specialists
● Crane operators
● Divers
● Offshore safety personnel
● Project managers
These are exactly the high-income technical jobs Sri Lanka should be creating for its youth.
Integrating Education with Industry
Trincomalee should not merely host industrial facilities; it should become Sri Lanka’s centre for offshore engineering education.
Vocational institutes, universities, and engineering faculties should establish specialised programmes in:
● Offshore welding
● Subsea engineering
● Dynamic positioning systems
● Marine electrical systems
● Offshore safety (OPITO standards)
● Rope access
● NDT inspection
● Offshore fabrication
● Renewable offshore energy
Students should graduate with internationally recognised certifications, making Sri Lanka an exporter of skilled manpower.
Synergy with the Energy Hub
The proposed oil storage facilities, bunkering operations, pipelines, and future refinery should be integrated with:
● FPSO maintenance
● Offshore logistics
● Rig lay-up and preservation
● Marine fuel services
● Offshore supply bases
● Wind farm component fabrication
Rather than functioning as isolated projects, these facilities should support an integrated offshore industrial ecosystem.
A Neutral Indian Ocean Service Centre
Sri Lanka occupies a politically neutral and geographically strategic location between the Middle East, Africa, India, and Southeast Asia.
Offshore operators frequently seek alternative repair locations when existing yards are congested or affected by geopolitical tensions. Trincomalee could become a preferred destination for repair, retrofitting, and offshore engineering services.
The Way Forward
The Government should immediately invite Expressions of Interest from internationally recognised offshore engineering companies, FPSO operators, ship repair firms, classification societies, and heavy engineering investors.
Public-private partnerships can minimise Government expenditure while attracting technology, management expertise, and global clients.
The objective should not merely be to develop another port, but to establish South Asia’s premier offshore engineering and floating energy infrastructure hub.
If this opportunity is missed, neighbouring countries will continue to capture these high-value industries while Sri Lanka remains dependent on traditional port services and low-value logistics.
Trincomalee has all the natural advantages. What is required now is the vision to transform those advantages into a globally competitive offshore industrial economy.

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Senaka Weeraratna

Sri Lankan Buddhist Societies, in particular Ceylon (Sri Lanka), saved the flame of the Buddha Dhamma in Germany from being blown out by the storm of historical events. This was the explicit conclusion of Dr. Hans Wolfgang Schumann (often referred to in documents as Dr. Wolfgang Schumann), a leading German scholar, author, and diplomat. Writing in the Maha Bodhi Journal (Feb–Mar 1971), Dr. Schumann highlighted the critical role played by Asoka Weeraratna and the German Dharmaduta Society (GDS) in rescuing German Buddhism from total collapse after World War II.

Dr. Hans Wolfgang Schumann

Ven. Nyanaponika Thero and Asoka Weeraratna at the Ratmalana Airport on February 20, 1953 before departing for Germany on a fact finding mission with the aim of establishing the Buddha Sasana in Germany

The Context of Post-WW2 Germany

The aftermath of World War II profoundly altered Germany’s intellectual, cultural, and spiritual landscape. The collapse of the Nazi regime prompted deep introspection, leading many Germans to question traditional institutions and explore alternative philosophies.

Following the devastation of World War II and the fall of the Nazi regime—which had aggressively suppressed Buddhist activities—German Buddhism was left fractured and without resources. When Sri Lankan (Sinhala Buddhist) philanthropist Asoka Weeraratna visited Germany in 1951, he witnessed a nation in a severe moral predicament and a civilization in crisis. He observed a deep “spiritual hunger” among war-weary Germans who were disillusioned with traditional Western religious-political systems and were searching for alternative philosophies based on peace and non-violence. [1, 2, 3, 4]

The Rescue of Das Buddhistische Haus

The pinnacle of the GDS’s intervention, as praised by Dr. Schumann, was the salvation of Das Buddhistische Haus (The Buddhist House) in Berlin-Frohnau. Founded originally in 1924 by Dr. Paul Dahlke, the landmark property had fallen into extreme disrepair during the war and faced imminent destruction. [1, 2]

According to Dr. Schumann’s writings:

• Preventing Liquidation: The historic center “probably would have been auctioned and dismantled” had the GDS not stepped in. [1]
• The Financial Rescue: Under Weeraratna’s leadership, the GDS utilized a large inheritance from a German Buddhist (Walther Schmits) to purchase the property in 1957–1958. [1, 2]
• Institutional Renewal: The GDS thoroughly renovated the property, added new living quarters, built a well-stocked library, and established it as the Berlin Buddhist Vihara—the first permanent Theravada Buddhist temple in continental Europe.

Dr. Schumann’s Call for Gratitude

Dr. Schumann emphasized that the mission’s success went beyond physical brick and mortar. By sending qualified Bhikkhus (monks) from Ceylon to reside permanently at the Vihara to lead meditation courses and lectures, the GDS established a reliable institutional foundation for the Dhamma. [1, 2]

Reflecting on this pivotal turning point, Dr. Schumann posited a final, enduring question to his country:

“The organizational help which Asian Buddhist Societies, in particular Ceylon, in several critical periods had extended saved the flame of the Dhamma in Germany. Isn’t this reason enough for the Germans to be grateful?“

---

If you want to explore this historical period further, let me know if you would like me to:

• Detail the journey of the first permanent monk mission sent from Sri Lanka to Berlin in 1957.
• Explain how Asoka Weeraratna raised the necessary capital via the “Million Rupee Fund”.
• Provide more context on the suppression of Buddhism under the Nazi regime prior to this revival. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• https://share.google/aimode/KXOygKgANzg5ne2WP
• Source:  AI Overview

Senaka Weeraratna

The legacy of Das Buddhistische Haus (The Buddhist House) in Berlin-Frohnau, Germany, represents the oldest and most enduring cultural and spiritual bridge between Europe and Sri Lanka. Founded as a monument to pure Theravada Buddhism, its survival and evolution are defined by two monumental figures: its pioneer creator, Dr. Paul Dahlke, and its savior, Asoka Weeraratna. [1, 2, 3]

---

🏛️ The Visionary Founder: Dr. Paul Dahlke (1924–1928)

Dr. Paul Dahlke (1865–1928), a prominent German physician and intellectual, is widely recognized as a foundational pillar of Buddhism in Western Europe. [1, 2]

• The Sri Lankan Connection: Dr. Dahlke traveled to Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) eight times. He mastered the Pali language under legendary Sri Lankan scholars like Ven. Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Nayake Thera.
• Literary Contributions: He translated extensive portions of the Pali Canon into German with immaculate clarity. He also published influential journals like Neu Buddhist and Brockensammlung.
• The Founding: In 1924, Dr. Dahlke utilized his own funds to construct Das Buddhistische Haus on a scenic six-acre hill in Berlin-Frohnau. He designed it to be a place of quiet reflection, ethical living, and authentic Theravada practice for Western seekers. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• The Interregnum: Following Dr. Dahlke’s death in 1928, the property fell out of Buddhist hands and into the possession of his non-Buddhist relatives. Decades of economic depression, World War II, and the post-war partition left the historic compound severely dilapidated and facing imminent destruction or public auction. [1, 2, 3]

---

🇱🇰 The Savior: Asoka Weeraratna & The German Dharmaduta Society (1952–1957)

Asoka Weeraratna (1918–1999) was a passionate Sri Lankan Buddhist philanthropist who established the German Dharmaduta Society (GDS) (originally the Lanka Dhammaduta Society) in Colombo on September 21, 1952. Driven by a post-colonial desire to share the Dhamma globally, Weeraratna set his sights on Germany. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

• The Discovery: During a rigorous survey tour of Germany in 1953, Weeraratna discovered the deteriorating remains of Dr. Dahlke’s historic Buddhist House. [1, 2]
• The Rescue: In December 1957, Weeraratna and the GDS officially purchased the property from Dr. Dahlke’s heirs. The purchase was fueled by fundraising in Sri Lanka and a critical financial grant from a German Buddhist benefactor, Walther Schmits.
• The Transformation: Weeraratna completely renovated the compound, built additional living quarters, and established the Hemamala Wickramasinghe Library, which became one of Europe’s premier public Buddhist libraries.
• The First Vihara: By stationing resident Sri Lankan monks (Bhikkhus) at the premises, Weeraratna transformed the private compound into the Berlin Buddhist Vihara—the very first permanent, functional Theravada Buddhist temple in continental Europe. [1, 2]

---

🌟 A Unified Intertwined Legacy

The combined efforts of Dahlke and Weeraratna created an institutional lineage that has thrived for over a century, celebrating its historic 100th Anniversary. [1, 2]

Feature	Dr. Paul Dahlke’s Era (1924–1928)	Asoka Weeraratna & GDS Era (1957–Present)
Primary Focus	Intellectual translation, personal practice, and publishing.	Active missionary work, international exchange, and monastic training.
Structure	Private residence, temple sanctuary, and scholarly retreat.	Fully functioning Buddhist Vihara with an established Sangha (monks).
Governance	Individually run by Dr. Dahlke and later his sister, Bertha.	Managed by Trustees of the Sri Lanka-based German Dharmaduta Society.

Today, Das Buddhistische Haus stands as a protected National Heritage site in Germany. It regularly hosts meditation retreats, public Dhamma discussions, and multi-national Vesak celebrations. Asoka Weeraratna’s legacy came full circle in 1972 when he renounced lay life to ordain as a monk, taking the name Ven. Mitirigala Dhammanisanthi Thera, leaving behind an unshakeable bridge between Sri Lanka and the heart of Europe. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

---

If you are researching this historical lineage, let me know if you would like to explore specific biographies of the first resident monks sent from Sri Lanka, details on the architectural fusion of German and Buddhist design at the house, or how the 100th-anniversary celebrations unfolded. [1, 2]

https://share.google/aimode/VwTdcnnjotfbcIbJu

Source:  AI Overview

Cognitive Drift

Christianity is losing its grip on the West. Once the dominant belief system, it’s now facing rapid decline as more people embrace secularism, science, and humanism. In this video, we’ll explore why churches are emptying, why younger generations are turning away from religion, and how cultural shifts, access to information, and scandals within religious institutions have accelerated the collapse. Is Christianity dying in the West? Let’s break it down.