Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe is scheduled to appear before the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) on Wednesday (11).
Former President Wickremesinghe will appear before the CID to provide a statement in relation to a complaint made by former Minister of Health Keheliya Rambukwella over the alleged importation of substandard human immunoglobulin vaccines.
Keheliya Rambukwella had previously lodged a complaint with the CID regarding the importation of medicines into the country.
Several ministers from the previous government have already provided statements as part of the investigation related to that complaint.
The Commissioner General of Prisons Thushara Upuldeniya, who was suspended from duty today (09), has been arrested by the Criminal investigation Department (CID), police confirmed.
Accordingly, the CID arrested the Commissioner General of Prisons this evening in connection with investigations into allegations that he aided and abetted the unlawful release of an inmate from Anuradhapura Prison under the Presidential Pardon granted for Vesak Poya.
The suspect is currently in the custody of the CID and is scheduled to be produced before Magistrate’s Court No. 01 at the Aluthkade Courts Complex tomorrow (June 10).
The CID is conducting further investigations into the incident.
Earlier today, a decision was taken by the Cabinet of Ministers to suspend the services of Commissioner General of Prisons Thushara Upuldeniya.
The decision was taken during today’s weekly Cabinet meeting chaired by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake.
The move comes as the CID launched an investigation over claims that an inmate of the Anuradhapura Prison was unlawfully released as part of the Presidential Pardon granted for this year’s Vesak Poya.
Accordingly, in order to facilitate an impartial inquiry, Commissioner General of Prisons Thushara Upuldeniya has been suspended.
Meanwhile, yesterday (08), the Superintendent of the Anuradhapura Prison was arrested by the CID over allegations of unlawfully releasing an inmate of the Anuradhapura Prison under the Presidential Pardon granted for Vesak Poya.
While Sri Lanka waged its final campaign to eliminate the LTTE terrorist organization between 2006 and 2009, the United Nations and UNHRC once again failed in their duty to uphold international law, protect civilians, or address terrorism impartially.
Context Behind Sri Lanka’s Decision to Militarily Defeat the LTTE
Unlike the swift and unilateral military actions taken by the United States and its allies after the 9/11 attacks—such as the bombing of Afghanistan (2001) and invasion of Iraq (2003) [1]—Sri Lanka’s campaign followed nearly three decades of sustained violence, failed peace efforts, and persistent LTTE violations of ceasefire agreements.
The LTTE’s insurgency included over 200 suicide attacks, ethnic cleansing of Muslims and Sinhalese from the North and East, political assassinations (including Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Sri Lankan President Premadasa), and the use of child soldiers[2][3].
In July 2006, the LTTE closed the Mavil Aru sluice gates, cutting off water to 60,000 civilians, triggering a humanitarian crisis condemned by both domestic and international actors [4].
President Mahinda Rajapaksa launched a military campaign with the dual aim of defeating terrorism and rescuing over 300,000 Tamil civilians held hostage as human shields by the LTTE [5].
UN and UNHRC’s Omission of Humanitarian Context
Despite the legitimate and humanitarian basis for the operation:
The UNHRC made no formal acknowledgment of Sri Lanka’s extensive record of ceasefires and negotiations from 1987 to 2006, including the failed 2002 Norwegian-brokered peace process [6].
The Mavil Aru incident, a clear war crime by the LTTE under international humanitarian law (IHL), was never condemned by the UN [7].
Sri Lanka’s 2009 operation is regarded as the largest humanitarian rescue mission during wartime, saving nearly 295,000 civilians, as confirmed by the UN Resident Coordinator and ICRC [8].
The ICRC, active in the conflict zone until May 2009, confirmed government cooperation in civilian evacuations and casualty treatment under the laws of war[9].
International Observations during Final Phase
UN Resident Coordinator Neil Buhne stated in 2009 that the Government cooperated with humanitarian agencies and facilitated civilian movement”[10].
Military attachés from India, China, Pakistan, and several EU countries visited the North and confirmed the Sri Lankan military’s professional conduct, particularly its adherence to minimizing civilian harm [11].
Civilian Protection Measures by the State
The government designatedNo Fire Zones (NFZs) and announced them through radio broadcasts and leaflets in Tamil, encouraging civilians to relocate [12].
Over 1.2 million food parcels were air-dropped into LTTE-held areas via the Air Force and WFP coordination missions [13].
LTTE Violations of International Law
The LTTE deliberately moved artillery into the NFZs and used civilians as human shields, breaching IHL Articles 51 and 58 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions [14].
Eyewitnesses, including UN field staff, confirmed LTTE snipers fired on fleeing civilians and laid landmines to prevent escape [15].
UN internal reports from 2009—later redacted—documented these atrocities but were ignored in official UN narratives [16].
Consultative Committee on Humanitarian Assistance (CCHA)
The CCHA, initiated in 2006 and chaired by senior officials, met bi-weekly with participation from the UN, ICRC, EU, USAID, and major INGOs [17].
All operational data and field access were transparently shared. No allegations of war crimes were raised during these meetings—a fact documented in CCHA minutes [18].
UN’s Failure to Condemn LTTE War Crimes
Despite the LTTE being a proscribed terrorist group:
The UN remained silent on the LTTE’s forced recruitment of over 5,700 children (as reported by UNICEF Sri Lanka)[19].
The LTTE’s repeated bombings of buses, trains, and religious sites—including the attack on the Sacred Tooth Relic Temple in 1998—were never the subject of UNHRC resolutions [20].
Global Counterterrorism Standards vs. Sri Lanka’s Experience
Under UNSC Resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1373 (2001), states were urged to freeze assets and take action against terror groups. These resolutions have been enforced against al-Qaeda, Taliban, and ISIS—but never the LTTE [21].
The LTTE was banned by India (1992), USA (1997), UK (2001), and EU (2006)[22]. These bans remain in effect, yet no UN action followed to dismantle LTTE networks operating globally.
Distorted UN Reports and Diaspora Influence
TheDarusman Report (2011), commissioned unilaterally by the UN Secretary-General, disregarded the UN Country Team’s field data and reports [23].
Gordon Weiss, former UN spokesman, admitted in media interviews that the civilian death toll he cited was speculative” and not based on verifiable data [24].
The SLMM (Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission) recorded 3,829 LTTE ceasefire violations between 2002 and 2005[25]. These were never acknowledged in UN assessments.
Post-War Narratives Driven by LTTE Diaspora
Western INGOs, such as those later exposed for receiving funds from LTTE fronts, were primary sources for post-war allegations [26].
Post-conflict claims only emerged after the defeat of the LTTE, when verification and firsthand documentation had ceased—a clear break from accepted human rights investigative standards[27].
UN Inaction in rescuing Tamil Civilians
No UN resolution was passed demanding the LTTE release civilians.
No safe corridors or international protection missions were deployed.
Instead, the UN disproportionately focused on state conduct, despite LTTE’s use of civilians as military shields—an act amounting to war crimes under IHL[28].
Conclusion: UN’s Accountability Gap (2006–2009)
The record reveals:
Selective enforcementof international norms—targeting only state actors like Sri Lanka.
Double standardsin counterterrorism, especially compared to action taken against ISIS or Boko Haram.
Credibility erosiondue to reliance on diaspora allegations and sidelining of real-time field evidence.
Key Questions the UN must answer:
Why was Sri Lanka denied support while combating a proscribed terrorist group?
Why were LTTE atrocities underreported or ignored despite clear documentation?
Why were international norms of neutrality abandoned in favor of post-war politicization?
Until these issues are transparently addressed, the UN’s role in Sri Lanka will remain one of complicity through omission.
Shenali D Waduge
Sources
[1] UN Security Council Resolutions 1368 (2001), 1373 (2001) on Afghanistan/Iraq. [2] LTTE Suicide Attacks Database – Ministry of Defence, Sri Lanka (2009). [3] Children in Armed Conflict: Sri Lanka”, UNICEF Reports 1998–2009. [4] Government of Sri Lanka, Mavil Aru Incident: A Humanitarian Crisis” – 2006 Cabinet Report. [5] Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Humanitarian Operation: Final Report” (2009). [6] Chronology of Peace Talks and LTTE Violations,” South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP). [7] ICRC Commentaries on the Geneva Conventions – Customary IHL. [8] UN Resident Coordinator Statement – Neil Buhne, May 2009. [9] ICRC Annual Report on Sri Lanka Operations, 2009. [10] UN Press Briefing, May 2009 – UN Sri Lanka Office. [11] Foreign Military Attaché Reports – Ministry of Defence, Sri Lanka Archives. [12] NFZ Announcements and Leaflets” – Ministry of Defence Archive (2009). [13] WFP & SLAF Joint Air Drop Records – 2008–2009. [14] ICRC Database of Customary International Humanitarian Law – Rule 97. [15] UN OCHA Staff Reports (2009) – Restricted Documents Archive. [16] Petrie Report” – UN Internal Review Panel on UN Actions in Sri Lanka (2012). [17] CCHA Meeting Minutes – Available through Ministry of Disaster Management. [18] Interview with Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha – Former Secretary to the Ministry of Disaster Management. [19] UNICEF Sri Lanka Reports – Recruitment of Children by LTTE (2002–2007). [20] LTTE Attacks on Civilians – MoD Archive, 1998–2008. [21] UNSC Resolution 1373 Implementation Tracker – UN CTED. [22] U.S. State Department – Foreign Terrorist Organization List; EU and UK Lists. [23] Darusman Report Review” – Analysis by Legal Advisory Council, GoSL. [24] Gordon Weiss, Interview with ABC Australia, 2010. [25] SLMM Ceasefire Monitoring Reports – 2002–2006. [26] US Senate Hearing on LTTE Diaspora Funding, 2006. [27] UN Guidelines for Human Rights Investigations – OHCHR Manual (2001). [28] Geneva Conventions Additional Protocol I, Articles 51(7), 58(c).
Before you study the economics, study the economists!”
e-Con e-News 01-07 June 2025
June furnishes us with humid, dripping, sopping, sodden, swampy examples of how the media in Sri Lanka lives in another world, perhaps in the City of London, or Wall Street, New York. Look how they act surprised by the annual SouthWest Monsoon, which had already long begun in the ocean outside wintry Southern-Eastern Africa (if there’s such a thing as a beginning, to winds) and seasonally lashes the country as it heads for the Himalayas and further north & east. Yet, like transport investigators tardy to the scene of an Ashok-Leyland bus accident, with news-media editorialists lamenting the loss of housing, roofs & lives, faking tears that are soon flushed away with the bountiful rains, the media then faithfully and belatedly tracks the devastation by flood and landslide, just as they devotedly trail the movement of the sun over our heads from Devundra to Pandatharippu in April & August, pretending to be exacting astronomers. But it is all reaction. There is little information for preparing people for this spell of wind & rain, or its failures, what cultivators & workers (the real majority!) should be doing or do, and the expected consequences… – and,where are the interviews with CEB repairing workersthe 50, 000 power outages across the country? – or, what precautions people may take, let alone discussing appropriate clothing or ‘fashions’! So, who decides this local media’s agendas & priorities? Well, we don’t have to look too far… (& don’t act surprised!).
‘USAID spends over a quarter billion dollars yearly
training & funding a vast sprawling network of more
than 6,200 reporters & nearly 1,000 ‘independent’
news outlets or journalism organizations…
the largest global propaganda network ever created’
– Lee Camp (see ee Media, Giant US Propaganda Web!)
*
‘Overseas School of Colombo’s first-ever Media Open Day sets
a new standard – opening its doors, hearts & soul to the media’
(see ee Workers)
*
‘CIC Holdings delivers resilient FY25 results with 9% topline growth’
(see ee Agriculture)
*
‘LOLC Group posts Rs41bn net profit; assets top Rs2trillion mark
The robust performance was fueled by steady expansion in financial services,
a series of strategic international acquisitions, & improving economic conditions.’
(see ee Finance)
*
Almost every single English medium in Sri Lanka reproduce & repeat company ‘press releases’, most times without changing one hyperbolic word. Since these ‘news’ items are actually non-industrial products (mere hulang) from these import merchant’s public relations (PR) agencies, shouldn’t they be clearly delineated as ‘paid’ advertisements? Most ‘news’ are pure ads, and repeated verbatim throughout media (see ee News Index below)! If this merchant media (owners, editors, reporters) are being paid (over & under the table) to reprint these ‘infocommercials’, shouldn’t they be declared as income and taxed, or exposed by the Bribery Commission? What says the Internal Revenue Department about these ‘paid printers’ who are usually full of ‘shlock & awe’ about politicians’ corruptions, etc? That is, when they are not photocopying corporate junk or state ‘media divisions’ signalling good intentions, all liberally deploying the infinitive tense: ‘to do’, ‘to implement’, with no follow-up on any such thing done or implemented. Then there are the mind-boggling array of prizes and awards being handed out daily – shouldn’t all these elaborate ceremonies be listed as tax-evading expenditures? Does the answer lie with that award-winning & prize-giving Institute of Marketing (SLIM), which claims to be Sri Lankan?
In this month of banks & financial institutions releasing their ‘first quarter’ (1Q2025) statements, shouldn’t their hyper claims about revenues & profits & premiums be modified by use of the words ‘reported’ or ‘claimed’? & how do they make their profits? Is it investment in production? or usury & speculation in real-estate? No such questions are asked! The nouns, verbs, adjectives & adverbs used in headlines include: ‘surpass, highest, top, robust, hike, achieve, leads,historic, strong’ – while providing no investigation into such nouns, verbs, adjectives & adverbs by the so-called ‘independent’ ‘free’ ‘nursemaids of democracy’ and ‘5th Estate’, offer no veracity to such claims. And it’s not just companies but ubiquitous nosey envoys (going far beyond their station, as if sticking up a middle finger in scatological defiance) & so-called NGOS (funded by OGs – other governments) – look (above) at the self-righteous hype of these international schools – which are illegal under the Education Act but operating under the Business Act.
Meanwhile, the Central Bank Governor, that good ‘non-medical Dr’ N Weerasinghe (A Heroic Lion) assures the US Chamber of Commerce in Sri Lanka (AmCham), that the ‘Collapse of the economy in 2028 is a myth’! Yet, one media cheerleader even exerts themselves to caution, albeit in obtuse financial jargon:
Sri Lanka ‘risks’ asset price inflation without real economic gains
‘Merchandise trade indicators reinforce concerns, with import expenditure
jumping 12.7% year-on-year to US$6.57bn in the first 4 months of 2025,
widening the trade deficit to $2.26bn. A notable surge in motor vehicle imports,
up a staggering 707.9% y-o-, has contributed to the imbalance, outpacing
export growth despite a 6.4% uptick in export earnings. While tourism earnings
rose to $257mn & remittance inflows hit $646mn, foreign investments in
government securities saw a net outflow of $12mn signaling persistent
global investor caution. ‘One would take a fleeting look at the data & say
bulls may be charging forward… but they should keep an eye on
storm clouds ahead. Without real economic productivity, Sri Lanka risks
liquidity-fueling asset price inflation rather than sustainable progress.’
(see ee Economists)
*
The controversial Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP) leader NM Perera’s 120th Birth Anniversary falls on June 6. As Finance Minister of a government that had won by a landslide in 1970, he famously informed his PM, Sirimavo Bandaranaike: ‘Madam, the kitty is empty.’ We all know what followed next, in 1971 (insurrection), 1973 (OPEC), 1974 (famine), and 1975 (destabilization), and sabotage of any industrial endeavours. And while now ‘Next’ turns out to be, not what comes after, but another English company stealing our labour, it is apropos that present LSSP leader Tissa Vitarana’s resounds the alarm, with a call to ‘Save Sri Lanka – We are in Danger‘. (see ee Focus)
Indeed, with the US attack on Russia’s nuclear force on June 1, the white world appears ready to imperil the whole world, including themselves. Yet, their media diverted to a purported rift between US President Don Trump and a senior advisor, E Musk, who only appear to differ on the recipe for how to cook & eat us, and our ranking on their menu!
Vitarana recalls the accomplishments of Sri Lanka’s first political party, the LSSP, formed in 1935 under English colonial rule (but, what about AE Goonesinha’s Ceylon Labour Party formed in 1928?). Vitarana lists the LSSP’s early ‘22 Demands’ including ‘free education & health, and complete trade union rights for all employees’. He also recalls the jailing of their leadership by the English (we should note here that SA Wickremesinghe was also jailed by the English, as a founder of the Communist Party of SL, which gave their full support to the USSR’s defeat of Germany’s Nazi war machine).
Vitarana also describes the LSSP’s controversial coalition with the SLFP, which resulted in LSSP leader Colvin R de Silva’s formulation of the first Republican Constitution in 1972. It turns out our English rulers and their readers do not know or care about what a Republic really means. He thus draws attention to the dangerous military agreements demanded by the USA & India that undermine such claims to be a Republic. He also describes the current state of affairs where ‘70% of families in Sri Lanka [live] below the poverty line’, adding: ‘Farmers & their families are deeply in debt to traders & mill owners. Suicides go unreported.’ He notes LSSP leader and Finance Minister NM Perera, who ‘by discouraging imports… promoted the national economy by increasing local food production & value-added industries’. Yet, curiously, there’s no mention of the modern (machine-making) industrialization required (as noted by the Karl Marx he invokes), to sustain all these otherwise utopian demands…
*
While we may wonder about such terms as ‘Global North’ (where Russia & much of Asia is also located) and ‘Western’ (which for us is firstly Andhra, Kerala, Tamilnadu & Africa), Shiran Illanperuma wonders: Can Global South Investments Develop Sri Lanka? (see ee Focus) He quotes the incessantly quoted Singaporean leader Lee Kwan-Yew who noted ‘in many newly independent states, the ‘will to resist often melts in the face of hard power’,’ while noting our bamboo-like wavering between ‘winds’ from the east & west. Illanperuma notes the recently signed ‘$3.2billion investment from Chinese state-owned enterprise Sinopec for an oil refinery’ in Hambantota, which Indian news agency IANS claims has hit ‘obstacles’. If it materializes, the investment would be ‘Sinopec’s firstoverseas refinery, creating opportunities for several downstream chemical industries’. He also notes how ‘monopolyinterests exist at every level of the agricultural sector, from the provision of credit, seeds, and fertilizers, to the processing, storage, transport, and marketing of the finished product’. He points to the crucial lack of ‘a real state-owned development bank’, unlike in the rest of Asia, and the challenge of overall coherence – requiring Sri Lankan people’s own responsibility to impose our priorities.
Illanperuma speaks of a ‘New’ Cold War – however we often wonder about such formulations. The wars in Asia – South, East, West & North – have indeed been ‘frozen’ since 1945, and more than just ‘Cold’, but also quite hot & horrific. The term implies a certain mutuality of aggression, when in fact, the US (& Europe) have for centuries been invading our countries and have only temporarily withdrawn in the face of resistance. How easily this merchant media tries to make us forget. He criticizes the entry of Israel into this country, even as Israel is nothing but a forward settler ‘province’ & frontline of the USA & Europe, etc, formed (clearly as a terrorizing trap for Muslims and Jews!), after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, along with various ‘Arab’ satrapies, who also enable the US & EU horror. Naming these wars correctly as white wars would go a long way to recognizing ‘thy enemy’ and who are friends really are…
*
Then following in this ee Focus, Vinod Moonesinghe analyzes the positives & drawbacks of the NPP government’s ‘Budget 2025 Industrial Zone Proposals: Challenges & Solutions’. He notes the allocation of ‘Rs500mn for 5 industrial parks, planned in Kankesanthurai, Mankulam, Iranawila, Galle, and Trincomalee’, but worries about a ‘lack of outstation industrial ecosystems’. He sees the need for large amounts of sulphuric acid from Paranthan, wih the Ministry proposing that the government-owned Lanka Phosphate make ‘ single super phosphate’ from the rock phosphate found in the Eppawela deposit, in Trincomalee – but suggests it ‘would prove very expensive and uneconomical. He believes there is ‘an idea of the ad-hoc nature of economic planning in Sri Lanka, and [a] lack of theoretical knowledge regarding the process of industrialisation’. He notes, ‘Trincomalee could exploit its natural harbour and its proximity to Eppawela to avoid costly inland transport and develop industries based on sulphuric acid and rock phosphate processing’.
He wishes the government would also look ‘to revive rail freight, eg, to reduce logistics costs for bulk chemicals’, which would require rebuilding ‘port-rail links for container transport’, and calls for the offer of ‘subsidised rail rates for industries in the new zones’. He concludes: the ‘2025 Budget’s industrial zone plans have potential but suffer from disjointed planning, transport inefficiencies, and unrealistic scaling’.
*
‘The most difficult struggles of the imperialist countries since
the 18th century had… been with… their own settlers’
– Emmanuel Arghiri, quoted in SBD de Silva’s
The Political Economy of Underdevelopment, 1982
*
This ee Focus continues looking at Sri Lanka’s Import-Export Mafia, via Chapter 5 of SBD de Silva’s monumental study. SBD’s thesis is proved in the incessant & saturated barrage in the media in Sri Lanka on the need for exports & foreign investment (for what? asked de Silva, to import their cars?). He also cogently rooted the English sabotaging of industrialization in Sri Lanka in capitalism’s ‘immanent tendency to stifle, suffocate & push back the full realization of the developmental potential of rival capitalisms. It is the nature of capital itself to demand the ousting of rival businessmen… the very basis of the central contradiction in capitalism arising from the appropriation of surplus value by fewer & fewer capitalists, while the production process is increasingly socialized.’
SBD de Silva saw the world’s economies divided into non-settler colonies like Sri Lanka, where the natives are the majority but are ruled by expatriate investors ruling from metropolitan capitals; whereas in the countries of ‘new settlement’ (US, Canada, Australia, etc) settlers through genocide had become the ruling majority and replicated the metropolitan economies; and then there are settler-colonies (South Africa, Congo, Kenya, Rhodesia, the Maghreb, etc) where there were a sizeable population of settlers, but the natives were still the majority. So genocidal settlers did not call for exports or rely on imports:
Settlers pressed for ‘policies committed to building up
internal rather than export markets, & even for protection
for industrialization despite what they saw to be
the opinion of English manufacturing interests
– MR Dilley
*
In Sri Lanka, English capital has been allowed to remain intact through a ‘post-colonial’ alliance between London’s investors and Colombo’s merchants who are thoroughly proud of their mimicking of English culture. Whereas, in the settler colonies, having first detached from their ‘parent’, they combatted or challenged attempts ‘by metropolitan capitalism to stifle their autonomous growth’ openly fighting London’s investors, shippers & factory owners, proudly ‘sabotaging’ Paris’s dictates. They won this ‘freedom’ through their insistent assertiveness and ‘political conflicts with the metropolitan interests’. Even in the non-settler colonies, relations with foreign investors in European capitals ‘were not entirely harmonious’. In Sri Lanka, eg, the English coffee planters engaged themselves in the country’s first constitutional struggles, ‘demanding a program of public works – roads, bridges and railways – and wanted a hand in the colonial budget’. However, London’s ‘absentee’ investors have always seen their ‘native’ brown satraps as more malleable…
*
With the recent local government elections in Sri Lanka being lamented as a ‘fiasco’, ee Focus continues looking at the 19th century roots of the USA’s political & economic mafia (actually the ruling capitalist class) through that original NGO – the ‘charity’ known as New York’s Tammany Hall, via Gustavus Myer’s history. It examines the origins of the US Democratic & Republican Parties‘ controls of the candidates through the role of ‘inspectors’ who chose delegates to party conventions ‘as they pleased.’ Sometimes factions of parties had simultaneous meetings in the same hall, at other times they prevented factions from entry to meetings through their ownership of the hall’s property, and usually through the use of gangsters – their main concern being their ‘share in the division of plunder’, ie, the ‘spoils’ of office, as they fronted for the then-nascent and rising banks, transport, railway and shipping corporations. We should remind readers of Tammany’s misuse of original American ‘native’ language such as ‘Wigwam’ (Ojibwa) to describe Tammany’s headquarters & ‘Sachems’ (Narragansett) to refer to the real leaders hidden in backrooms: the real rainmakers…
*
ee is dedicated to the memory of the dedicated scholarship of SBD de Silva, whose 7th death anniversary will occur in the coming week. We have wished to bring to ee readers the issues SBD foregrounded (‘Why don’t our garment factories make a pin?’) to transform Sri Lanka’s still-colonial labour-intensive and unproductive import-export plantation economy; to go beyond what our otherwise-occupied mass merchant media wishes to waste our eyes & minds & time on: They prefer to broadcast the retail crimes of petty criminals versus the wholesale crimes of multinational banks & corporations (eg, Unilever, CIC & Ceylon Tobacco Co, Caltex-Exxon, Standard Chartered & Citibank, etc) and the merchants & usurers they puppeteer. SBD, when asked about why he did not seek to express his ideas in the mass media, would retort: ‘What do they know or care about economic issues in Sri Lanka? Let me interview them!’
Captain Ibrahim Traoré delivered a bold, unapologetic speech that directly challenged the International Monetary Fund’s grip on African economies. His message was clear: Burkina Faso will not bow to Western financial pressure. This video breaks down Traoré’s historic words, the global reaction, and what it means for Africa’s economic liberation. 🔑 In this video, you will discover: ✅ President Ibrahim Traoré’s Bold Speech to the IMF Shocks the West ✅ Why Traoré confronted the IMF in his landmark speech ✅ How Burkina Faso plans to escape IMF economic control ✅ The West’s reaction to Traoré’s anti-colonial message ✅ Links between financial sovereignty and military independence ✅ What does this speech mean for Africa’s future with global institutions Traoré’s bold stand for dignity, economic freedom, and true independence
1.Genocide: Quote AI; Genocide is considered an international crime and is defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948). It involves acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Article II https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition: UN article II defines Genocide” as the following: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group.
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group.
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. 2.LTTE Firstly, before discussing the LTTE war aspect, let us dissect and analyze whether the act of genocide of Tamils transpired in SL over the past 77 years. Tamils lived and lived in all parts of the island, doing business, carrying out professional work, carrying out legal work etc. Can we quote the British conquering of India and Ceylon as genocide or invasion? It was an invasion. Similarly, Indian Kings of the South also invaded Ceylon. Did history quote in its text as genocide? Therefore, foreign powers coming into another country are referred to as invasions. Was any of the above from Article II committed by the military? We Tamils, particularly the Tamil diaspora, have confused ourselves with the intent of destroying the Sri Lankan reputation or with some malicious intent spreading the word, Genocide” all over the world. The reason is that we are selfish, powerful wealthy hungry humans. The question of racism and racial riots has to be addressed on a different platform. Ref: quote; https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/combating-racism-and-racial-discrimination-europe
3.Racism Racism is universal. In any country, people are faced with Racism”. In Sri Lanka racism” prevailed before 2024, and racial riots occurred in 1956,1958, 1977, 1983. Every racial riot had a particular reason to have kicked off. The killing of 13 army soldiers on the main road at Tirunelveli Road in Jaffna kicked off a racial riot in 1983 which was a serious concern by all. The bombing was organized by the LTTE which was a cowardly act. The inner secret of bombing the army staff at Tirunelveli must be addressed in a different chapter. Before 2024, and even now, Tamils were and are still in government jobs, doing business all over the country. The only difference is that the Tamil politicians were involved in protests and caused damage to the economy and growth of the country. The writer can prove that the LTTE group caused serious destruction to the Sri Lankan people and assets (movable & immovable) worth millions of dollars. What is the root cause of this destruction? The author of this article grew up in the Southern village of Kamburupitiya” from 1950 to 1956. This village had no electricity, water, sewage disposal system, no good roads etc. However, even in this village, Tamils were owning shops doing business. Therefore, the writer cannot conclude that Tamils were isolated oppressed and discriminated against. However, the North had good colleges, good roads etc. The writer’s letter to MA. Sumanthiran addresses all these shortfalls. The main driver here is that the Tamil elites are greedy and fond of wealth and power. Tamils wanted to hold all government jobs. Apartheid prevailed in the North & East. The elites who controlled the N&E politics were practising apartheid. The Tamil politicians were not fond of joining the governing party to govern SL. They wanted a separate state or a federal structure so that they could govern themselves. The main driver here is that” Tamils are Racists”. Not only that but also practice apartheid within their own Tamil community oppressing and discriminating against their own Tamils of non-elite groups. The elite Tamils think that non-elites have no brain, perception or intelligence. This is considered a severe weakness in the Tamil race. SJV Chelvanayagam, a Tamil politician who was born in Malaysia was elected the Tamil leader. He was in the state assembly in 1947 during the British time. However, after receiving independence, SJVC demanded a federal structure from the Sri Lankan government, not before independence during the British time. A proper study and analysis will aid us in concluding who the racists are in SL. 4.Post-1987 Post-1987 period: LTTE was instrumental in the murder of most of the leaders of other groups. The question of establishing their base at Mullaitivu, (Mullivaykal) is a different matter with in-depth studies. They planned cunningly to kill political opponents. Uma Maheswaran was the leader of PLOTE and was an educated honest person. He was a surveyor in the government department. He was eliminated by his opponents. The purpose of LTTE moving to Mullaitivu was to develop a deep political strategy by anti-socialists. Quote: The construction of the Hambantota Seaport began in 2007 and was completed in multiple phases in November 2010. Sri Lanka in a controversial move signed an agreement in 2017 wherein a Chinese state-owned enterprise, acquired a 70% stake in the port on a 99-year lease.28 Mar 2024. Also known as: Magampura Mahinda Rajapaksa (MR) Port. Why did SL allow China to build a port in the South? Is it to safeguard its territory from the West, India and the LTTE? It is an opinion that the day the port commenced construction, the LTTE was stamped out by the West. The West and India did not want China to encroach into the Indian Ocean. We can conclude as to why LTTE established its base on the East Coast. India was already against LTTE for the murder of Hon Rajiv Gandhi. When MR knew LTTE was manufacturing heavy weapons at Mullivaykal and they (LTTE) bombed Colombo, MR decided to commence offensive operations against LTTE. LTTE had already kept civilians as human shields at Mullivaykal. What occurred at Mullivaykal was a war between the so-called LTTE and the military. It is known that the military did not start operations to kill civilians, but the LTTE cadre. Death occurs in a war anyway. We Tamils are cashing on this situation that SL carried out genocide. Most Tamils migrate to the West and after some time enter politics and claim genocide. Although they move in as refugees or something, and after some time they enter politics. This is Prabakaran’s theory.
Conclusion Tamil diaspora are only interested in avenging SL for their defeat (LTTE). In the name of LTTE, a significant number of Tamils have become rich and are having a rich life. Even now one joker in Tamil Nadu claims that Prabakaran is alive and his daughter will rise to leadership. The root cause is that the LTTE (leftovers) are running out of money and want to collect money. The Tamil diaspora and the leftover LTTE are influencing the West to support their cause. The LTTE guy known as Kumaran Pathmanathan is alive in SL and could be contacted to know the truth. The government currently holding power is not a communist government but is interested in the welfare of its people and is against bribery and corruption. We the Sri Lankans request the West and the world not to interfere with the affairs of Sri Lanka; however, they could help SL in any way to improve its relations with the rest of the world and improve in technological advancement. The world should punish those who claim what happened in SL is genocide. Sri Lanka shall enact a law in its constitution that anyone who claims falsely that there was a genocide in SL should be debarred from entering SL and punished. This photo depicts the military escorting several tens of thousands of Tamil civilians who were kept as human shields by the LTTE at Mullivaykal to Kilinochi via Nandikkadal to safety. If it was genocide this escort would not have happened. This is Sri Lankan Buddhism theory and practice. Cc: United Nations Brampton Council Mayor Executive President of Sri Lanka
Colombo, June 8 (Daily Mirror) – Alleging that the President’s office and the Prisons Department had made contradictory statements on alleged granting of pardon to a person who was found guilty of misappropriating Rs 4 million just ten days after he was convicted , Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) MP Ajith P. Perera yesterday said he will raise the matter in Parliament during the next sitting week.
Department of Prisons has issued a statement defending the release of W.M. Athula Tilakaratne, a former finance company manager found guilty of misappropriating Rs. 4 million.
Prisons Spokesman Gamini B. Dissanayake said on Saturday that Tilakaratne was among a group of inmates released under the annual Vesak Poya Day general pardon, which is granted to prisoners who fulfill specific eligibility criteria.
The department emphasized that Tilakaratne was not singled out but qualified under general guidelines due to his sentence structure and remission of his fine. He had been convicted under Section 386 of the Penal Code by the Anuradhapura High Court and received a suspended prison term alongside a Rs. 2 million fine, payable as compensation. The court had ruled that failure to pay the fine would result in six months of rigorous imprisonment.
However a statement from the President’s media office said the inmate’s name was not included in the list of inmates who were to be pardoned for Vesak Poya. The statement also said CID has been asked to conduct an investigation on the incident.
We will raise this issue in Parliament continuously as it could be a serious issue. Any criminal can get away by fraudulently including his name in the pardon list,” MP Perera told Daily Mirror.
I will raise this matter in Parliament once again during the next sitting week from the relevant ministers,” he added.
Both the Ministry of Justice and the President’s office should have gone through the list of inmates who were to be granted pardon. The Prison Department sends the qualified list to the Justice Ministry and it is then sent to the President. The President then approves the list and resends it to the Ministry of Justice to implement the release after looking at the list once again. Therefore there cannot be a mistake on the lists of inmates who are to be pardoned unless it is manipulated,” the MP added.
Sri Lanka stands today as the ONLY nation that defeated one of the world’s most ruthless terrorist organizations—the LTTE—without international military assistance. In doing so, it upheld its sovereign duty to protect all citizens, irrespective of ethnicity or religion, and ushered in a lasting peace after 30 years of carnage. Yet, paradoxically, since that historic moment in May 2009, Sri Lanka has faced relentless international censure—driven not by legal objectivity, but by politically influenced narratives, double standards, and unverified claims. This set of questions is respectfully directed to the incoming High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Office of the UNHRC, in the spirit of transparency, fairness, and mutual accountability. These questions demand clarity on legal authority, procedural fairness, factual accuracy, and the continued erosion of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty through repeated country-specific resolutions, all while far graver human rights abuses in other global theatres are left untouched. It is time to ask: Has the UN system become a tool for political pressure, or does it still stand for the impartial protection of human rights and the sovereign equality of nations as enshrined in the UN Charter?
I. Violation of UN Charter & Sovereignty
Under which provision of the UN Charter was the UNSG authorized to appoint a Panel of Experts (PoE) on Sri Lanka in June 2010 without the consent of the General Assembly or Security Council?
Why was the PoE report leaked to the media instead of being officially tabled before the UNSC, UNGA, or OHCHR? Why was Sri Lanka denied the right to officially respond?
Why did the UN fail to consult the democratically elected Government of Sri Lanka before initiating external accountability mechanisms?
How does the UN justify selective scrutiny of Sri Lanka when it has not pursued similar inquiries in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, or Palestine?
Why has the UN never acknowledged that this is the only instance where post-war punitive action has been taken against a government that defeated a UN-designated terrorist group?
Why has the UNHRC never publicly affirmed Sri Lanka’s right to defend its sovereignty against terrorism, particularly from the LTTE, which employed suicide bombings, assassinations, child soldiers, and mass civilian massacres?
II. Illegitimacy of the UNSG’s Panel of Experts (Darusman Report)
Why was the Darusman Panel appointed in secret, with no Sri Lankan representation, and without UN General Assembly or UNSC mandate?
Is the UNHRC aware that the Darusman Report clearly statesit is not an investigation but merely an advisory report” to the UNSG?
Why did the UNHRC base multiple resolutions and OHCHR reportson an advisory note (Darusman Report) which lacks legal standing and admissibility in courts?
What ethical standardswere followed in releasing the Darusman Report selectively to the public and media, before giving Sri Lanka a chance to respond?
III. Bias & One-Sidedness in UNHRC Resolutions
Why have all UNHRC resolutions singled out Sri Lanka’s armed forces and government, while ignoring the LTTE’s 30 years of mass murder, bombings, child conscription, and use of human shields & hostages?
Why did the OHCHR reports and resolutions omit or downplay the countless war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the LTTE, including the killing of Tamil civilians who refused to join them?
Why has the UNHRC never conducted or demanded an investigation into international complicity in arming, funding, or politically supporting the LTTE?
IV. Post-War Manipulation, Legal Overreach & Lack of Closure
Why is the UNHRC pressuring Sri Lanka to adopt hybrid courts, transitional justice mechanisms, and foreign interventions while dismissing the success of post-war domestic processes, such as the LLRC, rehabilitation of 12,000 ex-combatants, and reintegration of 594 former child soldiers?
What is the legal basis for proposing hybrid courts and inclusion of foreign judges when Sri Lanka is not a party to any treaty or agreement that compels such interference in its judicial sovereignty?
Why has there been no recognition by the UN or OHCHR of Sri Lanka’s voluntary and unprecedented efforts at post-conflict reconciliation, including the reintegration of former LTTE fighters, demining, and infrastructure rebuilding in war-torn areas?
How does the UNHRC justify persistent country-specific targeting in breach of its own principle of impartiality and equal treatment of all member states?
What is the UNHRC’s legal mandate to apply international human rights law (IHRL) selectively to a non-international armed conflict when the correct legal framework under international law is International Humanitarian Law (IHL)?In armed conflicts, IHL—not HRL—is the governing legal regime. On what basis does the OHCHR elevate human rights law over IHL, particularly when assessing the final stages of the Sri Lankan conflict?
Can the UNHRC clarify why it continues to ignore that during armed conflict, actions are governed by the Geneva Conventions and related customary humanitarian law—not by the framework of civil peacetime human rights law?
V. Inconsistencies, Secrecy & Data Manipulation
Why did the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) continue to quote the unverified figure of40,000 civilian deaths in Sri Lanka’s final war phase, despite lacking independently verified names, forensic evidence, or transparent methodology?
Why has the UNHRC and OHCHR ignoredSri Lanka’s official census data (7,400 deaths) and UN Country Team estimates (7,721 deaths)—both based on ground-level assessments—yet the PoE stated this figure was too small to accept”?
On what grounds has the United Nations refused to release its owninternal wartime communications, situation reports, and casualty logs that would provide an accurate and impartial death toll—especially when those internal records reportedly do not support the inflated death figures circulated by media outlets and repeated in UN resolutions?
Why has the UN system, including OHCHR, failed toaudit and disclose the data sources, field methodologies, and statistical models behind these influential but disputed figures, even when requested by member states?
Is it not a violation ofbasic standards of evidence and fairness for the UN to have permitted unverified claims of mass civilian deaths to be used as the basis for repeated resolutions against Sri Lanka, while denying Sri Lanka the right to challenge the figures or present its own verified data?
VI. Accountability & Transparency in UN Process
Will the UNHRC declassify all communications related to Sri Lanka’s war from 2006 to 2009, including those of the UN Resident Coordinator’s office, NGOs, and affiliated agencies?
What mechanisms does the UNHRC have in place to prevent conflict of interest, where NGOs writing reports also fund or influence UNHRC resolutions?
What steps will the UNHRC take to ensure that Sri Lanka is not coerced into accepting foreign models of justice that violate its Constitution?
VII. Historical Context & Double Standards
Why is the UN silent about the LTTE’s assassinations of Tamil leaders, including Lakshman Kadirgamar, Neelan Thiruchelvam, and hundreds of Tamil civil society leaders?
Will the UNHRC acknowledge that Sri Lanka’s conflict was not ethnicbut caused by separatist terrorism, and apologize for misrepresenting it as Sinhala-Buddhist oppression?
Why does the UN refuse to engage in truth-telling about the foreign governments and NGOs that supported the LTTE directly or indirectly during the war?
VIII. Final Questions of Good Faith
Does the UNHRC believe that Sri Lanka, having ended a ruthless terrorist insurgencyand resettled over 300,000 civilians, deserves recognition rather than condemnation?
Will the new UNHRC leadership commit to impartiality, abandon politicized pressure, and finally allow Sri Lanka to heal without foreign interference?
Will the HRC agree to review and audit the legality of all resolutions passed on Sri Lanka since 2012 and their alignment with the UN Charter?
IX. Defamation of War Heroes & absurdity of Genocide claims
Why is the UNHRC silent while decorated Sri Lankan war heroes—who courageously led operations to end terrorism—are falsely accused of war crimes and genocide, and even subjected to foreign sanctions, despite no credible legal proceedings or evidence?
How does the UN justify branding individuals as war criminals when the very army commander who led the military campaign is not among the accused, exposing the arbitrary and politically motivated nature of these allegations?
Can the UNHRC explain how saving 300,000 Tamil civilians through the largest hostage rescue operation in modern military history can be reconciled with the accusation of deliberately killing 40,000 civilians? Isn’t such a contradiction absurd and defamatory?
Why have foreign governments that actively supported, funded, or harbored LTTE operatives—despite LTTE’s proscription under UNSC Resolution 1373—never been investigated or held accountable?
Why is there no scrutiny of the LTTE-linked diaspora entities still operating in foreign capitals, openly glorifying terrorism and distorting the narrative with fabricated death tolls?
How does the UNHRC justify the repeated citation of the 40,000 civilian death claim when there are no verified bodies, no police complaints, no forensic evidence, and even the UN’s own country team and Sri Lanka’s census data contradict this number?
Is it not time for the UN to call out the propaganda, reject data manipulation, and end this politically driven witch-hunt? The truth must prevail, and false genocide labels must not be allowed to taint a nation that defeated terrorism and safeguarded human lives.
What the JVP–NPP Government & President Anura Kumara Dissanayake must demand from the visiting UNHRC Head:
Declassificationof all UNHRC/OHCHR internal reports and wartime communications related to Sri Lanka.
Reciprocity & equalityin how human rights violations are assessed—especially when Western powers evade similar scrutiny.
A full reviewof all UNHRC resolutions passed against Sri Lanka, including their legal basis and procedural fairness.
These questions and expectations represent the sentiments of a nation that has endured terrorism, protected its sovereignty, and pursued peace—despite external pressures and distortions. The time has come for transparency, fairness, and closure.
Let Sri Lanka remind the incoming High Commissioner for Human Rights that this nation endured three decades of brutal terrorism. If the effort, urgency, and scrutiny that the UN and UNHRC have exerted since the defeat of the LTTE had been applied during the LTTE’s reign of terror, countless innocent lives could have been saved. Instead, the current UN approach appears more focused on questioning how the terrorists were eliminated than on appreciating the peace that now prevails. It is time to acknowledge the undeniable reality:
Sri Lanka is living without terror today—not because of international intervention, but in spite of it.
by A. Abdul Aziz, Sri Lankan Correspondent, Al Hakam, London.
(Given below is the gist of Eid-ul-Adha Sermon delivered by His Holiness Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad – Supreme Head of the Worldwide Ahmadiyya Muslim Community on 6 June 2025 at the Mubarak Mosque in Islamabad, UK, after led the congregational Eid-ul-Adha Prayer)
After reciting the first part of the Arabic Sermon Ahmadiyya Khalifa recited the verses of the Holy Quran Chapter 22 verse 35 – 38, the meaning of which goes:
And to every people We appointed rites of sacrifice, that they might mention the name of Allah over the quadrupeds of the class of cattle that He has provided for them. So your God is One God; therefore submit ye all to Him. And give thou glad tidings to the humble.
Whose hearts are filled with fear when Allah is mentioned, and who patiently endure whatever befalls them, and who observe Prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them.
And among the sacred Signs of Allah We have appointed for you the sacrificial camels. In them there is much good for you. So mention the name of Allah over them as they stand tied up in lines. And when they fall down dead on their sides, eat thereof and feed him who is needy but contented and him who supplicates. Thus have We subjected them to you, that you may be thankful.
Their flesh reaches not Allah, nor does their blood, but it is your righteousness that reaches Him. Thus has He subjected them to you, that you may glorify Allah for His guiding you. And give glad tidings to those who do good.” (Surah al-Hajj, Ch.22: V.35-38)
His Holiness Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad – Hazrat Khalifatul Masih(may Allah be his Helper) said that these verses explain that true sacrifice isn’t merely sacrificing animals for the sake of it, rather the lesson that is imparted is that lesser things are sacrificed for greater ones. So just as animals are sacrificed for God the Great, in the same way if we are ever required to provide any sacrifice for God we should put ourselves forward.
The commandments given by God should be acted upon, as this is how we will reach the true standard of sacrifice. We should be ever ready to extend our necks for the sake of Allah the Almighty.
Huis Holiness went on to explain that the meat that we distribute and the resulting blood that is spilled does not benefit God. What He wants is your taqwa (righteousness), that you remember to fear Him, and that you always stay aware of how to act upon His instructions to attain His pleasure.
His Holiness mentioned that in Pakistan, Ahmadis are barred from offering the Eid sacrifice, since the past few years. However, the purpose is taqwa, so even though we’re unable to sacrifice an animal on Eid, the important thing is that God is more concerned with our intentions. If our intention is that we want to offer a sacrifice in accordance with the commandments of God and to seek His pleasure, then God will accept that as a sacrifice.
There are many people who buy lots of animals to sacrifice, and make huge announcements about it. But is this really the true essence? Does God instruct those same people to put others through difficulty to attain His pleasure? Not at all. God’s Prophet, Muhammad(PBUH) said that whoever said la ilaha illallah (I bear witness that there is no God but Allah) is a Muslim – but what these so-called Muslims do is against the commandments of God about treating others well.
We should remember that these sacrifices are only to improve our taqwa and lead us closer to God. Whilst acting upon His commands, we should obey Him to the best of our abilities. Even if we aren’t able to sacrifice an animal on Eid, but we act on the rest of our teachings then God will accept the intention of that sacrifice, as He has explicitly mentioned that it’s not the meat of the animals that reaches Him (Surah al-Hajj, Ch.22: V.38). In light of this, we should focus on acting on God’s commandments.
Through these commandments, God has informed us that our true purpose is worship. This can only be done once huqooq-ul-Ibaad (the rights owed to mankind) are fulfilled. HIS Holiness went on to explain that the other side of this, huqooqullah (the rights owed to Allah), consist of the five daily prayers, particularly in congregation at the mosque.
However, if for instance in Pakistan, Ahmadis are stopped from congregating at the mosques, then if there are places or houses where the conditions are not as harsh, Ahmadis should congregate there for their prayers. This way we’ll be able to find solace in God from our opponents.
His Holiness went on to explain that in order to fulfill the rights of this sacrifice made on the day of Eid, we must fulfil the rights of our worship by falling in prostration to God, weeping like children and beseeching Him, in result of which He’ll listen to us and safeguard us from our opponents.
His Holiness instructed the Ahmadis of Pakistan to particularly focus on this because God keenly listens to the supplication of the oppressed. (Jami` at-Tirmidhi, Hadith 3598) Hence, If we give due attention to this we will become the recipients of God’s blessings.
Salat (obligatory prayer) is not meant to just be a tick-box exercise, rather we should offer our prayers in a proper manner. If we do this then God will bless us so much that the obstacles created by our opponents will be removed.
His Holiness emphasised that on this day, we should take an oath to increase the standard of our worship.
This also applies to others across Europe and other parts of the world where Eid is being celebrated.
In Pakistan, Ahmadis cannot offer Eid in congregation due to the authorities, whilst we [outside of Pakistan] are able to pray feely. However, we shouldn’t let this cause despair. His Holiness instructed Ahmadis in Pakistan to offer Eid prayers in their homes and to take an oath to fulfill the rights of God, and to worship in such a manner as if they are at the throne of God. This will result in God’s blessings and favours, so much so that the opponents will wither away.
To fulfil the standard of Salat and worship, we should make our utmost effort. His Holiness explains that the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad – Promised Messiah, peace be on him, has expounded on this philosophy (Al Hakam, 24 July 1902), in which he explains that there are two parts to worship, which are the fear and love of God.
The fear of God is such that it takes us towards the fountain of God, and that we are able to fulfil the rights of worship.
The Promised Messiah, peace be on him, went on to say that man should love God according to His due, by discarding the love of the world and making God the true beloved.
There are many ways to fulfil both of these huqooq (rights), but they are interlinked to the emotions of fear and love. It might seem like a strange thing to have both of these together, how can one love someone Who they fear? However, the fear and love of God is an entirely different philosophy.
The more a person fears God, the more his love for Him will increase and vice versa. This will take him away from vices and bring him closer to good deeds. In this way, both of these emotions are interlinked.
The Promised Messiah, peace be on him, said that to develop both of these emotions, Islam has established Salat (for fear), and Hajj (for love).
Ahmadiyya Khalifa mentioned that these days people have gone for Hajj. This is a show of love [for God]. Although Ahmadis are generally barred from Hajj, many manage to go for Hajj anyway to partake in this endeavour.
Hence, because Salat increases our fear of Allah, to transform that fear into love, God instructed us to perform Hajj.
Hajj includes all pillars of love. A person adorns himself with less clothing than in ordinary circumstances, which is a sign of love, since we’re not concerned with what we’re wearing in that condition. This is like the example of a person who removes their clothing for their beloved. That’s a worldy person’s love – our love for God should be even greater. Other elements of the Hajj also emulate the emotion of love, such as the kissing of the black stone, and the sacrificing of animals which is the highest standard of love.
Hence, Hajj is performed to express this love, as is the sacrifice offered on Eid. Wherever we are stopped and obstacles are placed in front of us, God knows the condition of our hearts and of the standards of our worship. He will bring ease for us. And He will reward us for the worship we are being stopped from, since He is extremely generous.
If we attain the proper standards of worship and fulfill the due rights, we will reach a level of the fear of God which will then culminate into love. As we get closer to God, He will make our opponents disappear.
Our opponents desire to make us leave our faith, but those Ahmadis who have true faith in their hearts do not falter.
We should increase our worship. If we can’t sacrifice an animal, then wherever possible and to whatever degree, we should worship God in our houses and prostrate to Him.
We should increase our worship to such a degree that it is an expression of the true fear of God. This will enable us to reach the highest standards of sacrifice.
We should also obey God’s command of helping the poor, since it’s not just about feeding ourselves and our neighbours. Where animal sacrifices are not possible, other sacrifices can be made to help the poor, for which the Jamaat provides platforms.
People should also help their friends and relatives in other countries who are not as well off. There are many Ahmadis who haven’t just sacrificed animals, but also given lots of financial sacrifice using their money as donations.
So even if we’re being stopped from one path of sacrificing, God has provided us with other routes. The Ahmadis of Pakistan are being stopped from these sacrifices, but in other parts of the world we should step forward and increase our tabligh (preaching) efforts, in line with God’s instructions. Whilst fearing him we should pray that he allows us to understand the true essence of sacrifice.
Additionally, God instructs us to keep away from vices and bad environments. In this day and age, bad environments aren’t merely confined to physical gatherings, rather they include consuming harmful content on the internet, TV, and other digital platforms. This is not an issue limited to the youth, but even older people fall into this vice. If we partake in such things then sacrificing an animal on Eid won’t be of much benefit to us.
The spirit of sacrifice should be in accordance with that of Abraham, peace be on him, Hajra, peace be on her and Ismail, peace be on him. Only in that case will it be considered a true sacrifice.
In Pakistan as well as other places, if people can’t offer animal sacrifice, they should increase their good deeds and sacrifice their desires.
Ahmadiyya Khalifa explained in depth further and concluded sermon, then extended a hearty Eid mubarak” to everyone and led everyone in du‘a (silent prayer).
Smart state planning plus ferocious market competition
In standard western economic textbooks, state planning and market competition are mutually exclusive. Thatcher and Reagan brought western capitalism into the neoliberal phase by claiming Government is not the answer. Government is the problem”, putting market fundamentalism on the altar. On the other side, Soviet central planning proved rigid and wasteful, leading to the eventual collapse of USSR.
Observing and learning from others’ development path, China went through three distinct economic models in the past 70+ years –
1949 – 1978, emulation of Soviet central planning phase, which provided the country a heavy industrial foundation but failed to deliver an adequate standard of living
1978 – 2012, free-wheeling laissez faire full-on capitalist phase, which saw rapid economic growth, rising standard of living but also wealth disparity, environmental degradation, and low value-added industrialization
2012 – now, mixed state planning and market competition phase, which is featured by state-led industrial upgrade programs, intense market-based competition, rapid improvement in industrial sophistication, and hopefully rise above middle-income trap to become the leading industrial powerhouse
I thought it would be interesting to discuss the features of this unique China model and the implications.
The two parts of this model – state planning and market competition – form an integrated approach to national economic development.
State planning incorporates these elements –
Identify key industries to focus
Set concrete and tangible targets (e.g. the 200+ goals set in MIC2025)
Align policy support
The planning function is carried out by the China State Planning and Development Commission, which assembles the best minds in the government, academia, think tanks, and industries and goes through multi-year research, studies, and survey to understand and predict key technological trends and future market demand. Then they iterate and socialize the plans until there is broad buy-in.
Once top-line state planning priorities are set, central government empowers local governments to implement the policies. At the implementation level, fierce market competition becomes the norm.
Local governments compete with each other. Each local government is powerfully incentivized to create local tech and industrial champions as career advancements are typically tied in with achievements of national priorities.
Local governments will unleash suites of policy support measures to attract and help businesses succeed, including –
Preferential tax
Land use priority
Preferential bank loans, even venture capital financing from government agencies (e.g. Shanghai and Shenzhen each has multi-billion dollar semiconductor funds)
Other policy support even extends to –
Establish educational programs at universities to train and develop scientific and technical talents specifically for identified industries and technologies (e.g. AI, robotics, hypersonics, rare earth mining and refining, rail, ship building, etc.)
Roll out talent acquisition programs to provide housing, allowances, and compensation equalization schemes to attract talents to move to their cities. Some governments even provide WeWork type of office facilities to startups for free.
Invest in infrastructure upgrades including 5G coverage, EV charging stations, high speed rail, ports, bridges, etc. to enable smooth operation of large industrial enterprises.
Invest in local parts and components supply chains that can be plugged into specific manufacturing sectors.
Promote successful technical leaders and executives in critical industries into senior government positions (e.g. the head of AVIC, the leading aeronautic business in China, was promoted to become a provincial governor)
The central government went so far as to crack down on monopolistic consumer tech companies such as Alibaba and Tencent in 2019 as these companies were consuming too much financial and talent resources and preventing startups from emerging.
The main goal of the crackdown is to redirect resources (funding, talent) to more productive directions such as AI and hard tech.
As a result, in the key technological and industrial hubs across China, from Shanghai, Shenzhen, Wuhan, Chengdu to Hefei and Changsa, you will find hundreds of EV companies, solar energy companies, AI and robotics start ups, ship builders, and drone companies that are developing innovative technologies, building production capacity, and engage in intense competition for consumers.
In the competition, there are private businesses, state owned enterprises, and foreign companies as well. All have to compete for customers on price and quality and operate with razor thin margin. Innovation and cost efficiency are prized in the never-ending loop of hyper competition.
The Chinese industrial and technological ecosystem is often described by insiders as arena for gladiators”. In a survival of the fittest environment, the winners of such competitions emerge as world class champions.
The same model is replicated in industry after industry from EV, smart phones, solar energy, robotics, ship building, AI large language models, drones, chip making, and biopharmaceuticals.
Many people mistakenly assume the Chinese state planning model means the government picks the winners and losers. That cannot be further from the truth. State planners pick the priority industries, define the swim lane, provide policy incentives, and then market takes over to decide the winner.
In contrast, the US industrial policy is more guilty of government picking winners – just witness how both Biden and Trump surround themselves with senior executives of incumbent tech giants when they announce policies such as the Chips Act, Inflation Reduction Act, or the Stargate program. Almost by definition, the main beneficiaries of these industrial policies will be the companies in the room. Market competition doesn’t seem to play the same decisive rule as in China.
As China accelerates the third mixed-economy phase of its industrial development, we can expect to see more Chinese companies will innovate faster, scale in the largest single market in the world, and become world-class competitors in their industries. Profit margins will be kept low as competition will never rest. However, more consumer surplus will accrue to customers, leading to improvement of living standards for all.
Sri Lanka at the Center of maritime connectivity between ASEAN and GCC need an ‘Asia First” Foreign Policy
Sufian Jusoh and Joanne Lin assess Malaysia’s bold initiative to host the inaugural ASEAN-GCC-China Summit, exploring its strategic rationale, economic potential, and the implications for ASEAN’s centrality in a shifting global order. The ASEAN-GCC-China Economic Summit, set to take place in Kuala Lumpur on 27 May, under the Malaysian Chairmanship of ASEAN, marks a significant diplomatic first. It will bring together leaders from ASEAN, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC consisting of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates), and China for a formal trilateral gathering. While ASEAN already maintains institutional relationships with both China and the GCC, this summit, initiated by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, ushers in an unusual diplomatic configuration whose long-term implications remain uncertain. Malaysia’s bold move is underpinned by strategic calculus. By convening this trilateral platform, it aims to elevate its international profile, expand economic ties with the Middle East and China, and assert leadership within ASEAN amid a shifting global order. The declining influence of the US in the Global South, coupled with increasingly polarising US policies in the Middle East, has opened space for alternative South-South alignments. The imposition of draconian tariffs on Southeast Asian exports under Trump’s second term has further underscored the urgency for the region to diversify beyond traditional Western markets. According to Mr Anwar, it is about ensuring ASEAN’s strategic relevance in a multipolar world”.
There are at least three rationales for the trilateral summit: promoting ASEAN Centrality, creating a new South-South economic alliance, and forming a new partnership to neutralise the geoeconomic impact of the tariff war.
First, the initiative provides an opportunity to further integrate ASEAN into the global economy and reinforce its centrality in global economic relations. It aligns with the Global ASEAN” vision under the ASEAN Community Vision 2045 which emphasises an outward-looking ASEAN. Through partnerships with emerging Global South countries, such as China and in the GCC, ASEAN seeks to pursue joint economic benefits that go beyond traditional Dialogue Partners.
Second, the summit will provide a platform for ASEAN, the GCC and China to explore the promise of deeper economic collaboration through a trilateral framework, beyond their existing bilateral ties. While ASEAN already maintains strong trade and investment relations with both China and individual GCC states, this proposed configuration could lay the groundwork for more structured engagement across regions. According to the World Bank, the combined annual GDP of ASEAN, GCC and China amounts to US$23.70 trillion in 2023, marking 22.3 per cent of the total world GDP in the same year. ASEAN, the GCC and China also make up a large market, with combined population of ASEAN, the GCC, and China at approximately 2.15 billion people.
The trilateral summit aims to harness each other’s strengths in economic activities, especially in trade, investment and supply chains. According to Dato’ Seri Mohamad Hassan, Foreign Minister of Malaysia, the summit is a step forward in forming an influential trilateral alliance to unlock broader economic cooperation among the three parties (building on their existing bilateral ties).
The economic potential from the trilateral arrangement is huge. ASEAN-China trade was US$700 billion in 2023. In the same year, ASEAN-GCC trade was approximately US$130.7 billion, mostly in oil and gas, energy and financial services. Furthermore, the GCC-China trade was approximately US$316.4 billion in 2022. Chinese FDI into ASEAN stood at US$17.7 billion in 2023. FDI from the GCC into ASEAN grew from US$265.8 million in 2018 to US$390.2 million in 2023, mainly in wholesale and retail trade and financial services.
Leaders pose for a family photo during the First ASEAN-GCC Summit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on 20 October 2023. (Photo by United Arab Emirates Presidentia / ANADOLU / Anadolu via AFP)
These present immense opportunities for further trade and investment supply-chain, as well as creating new economic opportunities and activities in areas such as clean and renewable energy, digital economy, electric vehicles, financial markets, halal products and services, and infrastructure development. However, whether this potential can be fully realised will depend on the ability of ASEAN, the GCC and China to overcome structural and regulatory differences, and to identify concrete areas for collaboration.
While the trilateral partnership does not entail a new formal trade agreement at this stage, it could explore synergies by building on existing frameworks. For instance, existing agreements such as the ASEAN-China Free Trade Area (ACFTA) and the Regional Cooperation Economic Partnership (RCEP), could serve as useful reference points. While the GCC is not a party to these frameworks, the trilateral partnership may draw lessons from their structures and standards—such as in rules of origin, e-commerce and investment facilitation— as potential models for future cooperation between ASEAN-GCC and GCC-China.
Third, the trilateral summit could potentially assist in countering export restrictions and additional tariffs implemented by the US, through the creation of new markets for ASEAN products and services and providing opportunities to access technologies which the US may restrict. This provides ASEAN, which sees itself as a middle power, to leverage on the GCC and China to collaborate with and function as a counterweight to other major powers. The growing ASEAN trade with China and the United States makes ASEAN vulnerable to the geopolitical tensions between the two major powers. At the same time, the GCC has been working on a new foreign policy approach, allowing the grouping to work with countries and regions with impressive economic growth, looking for regions with surging energy demand, whilst reducing the GCC dependency on the West. In this regard, the GCC has been expanding its economic foreign policy to focus on new partners in Eastern Asia, i.e. to include ASEAN and China. It has been observed that, despite its close geo-political and geo-economic relations with the West, the GCC has continuously built selective economic relations with China.
The summit also provides an avenue for a new coalition of countries supporting a strong multilateral economic order under the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The intra-grouping consensus building involving two major regional economic groupings and the second largest economy in the world can provide an avenue to balance and hedge against an uncertain and challenging world economic order, particularly, the uncertainty surrounding US economic policies under the second Trump’s presidency including tariffs, export restrictions and unilateral trade measures.
Nevertheless, ASEAN must be mindful that the GCC is neither a supranational entity like the EU nor a charter-based organisation like ASEAN. It is a loose coalition where members are free to pursue their own external relations. Internal divisions—such as the Saudi-UAE rivalry, differing positions on the Gaza conflict, and the 2017 Qatar Crisis—underscore the bloc’s fragility. From a functional perspective, areas as mentioned above present promising ground for trilateral collaboration. However, translating these opportunities into actionable outcomes will require clear frameworks, institutional follow-up, and genuine alignment of priorities. Furthermore, although bilateral ties between individual ASEAN countries—such as Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia—and GCC members, particularly the UAE, have flourished in sectors such as energy, construction, infrastructure, telecoms, tourism and banking, ASEAN-GCC cooperation between the two regional groupings remains relatively underdeveloped. It was only in 2023 that ASEAN and GCC convened their first summit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, with both sides agreeing to meet biennially. China, for its part, has expressed willingness to deepen mutually beneficial cooperation” with ASEAN and GCC countries at the summit. However, it has yet to publicly confirm its level of
representation or outline any substantive deliverables. This measured and cautious stance suggests that while the initiative aligns with China’s broader interest in advancing Global South cooperation, its engagement will likely depend on the clarity of the summit’s agenda and how it serves China’s longer-term regional objectives.
For ASEAN, China’s inclusion may enhance the platform’s diplomatic and economic weight, but it also brings added complexity, particularly in terms of geopolitical signaling and institutional coordination. As global rivalries intensify and minilateral arrangements proliferate, ASEAN will need to ensure that this summit complements, rather than competes with its existing frameworks, such as the ASEAN Plus Three and the East Asia Summit, to maintain coherence and regional unity.
While the future of this trilateral format remains uncertain—whether it will be one-off or evolve into a regular fixture—its success hinges on how it is positioned within ASEAN’s broader strategic agenda.
Ultimately, the ASEAN-GCC-China Summit should not be viewed as a geopolitical pivot, but a pragmatic platform for advancing economic and functional cooperation across two dynamic regions. If carefully managed, it could serve as a vital bridge between Southeast Asia, the Middle East and China—expanding ASEAN’s economic reach in an increasingly multipolar world. This vision reflects the spirit of Malaysia’s 2025 ASEAN Chairmanship: to strengthen ASEAN’s relevance, broaden its partnerships and amplify its voice within the Global South.
Avigdor Lieberman said Israeli forces, under prime minister’s orders, are giving weapons to ‘crime families’ in Palestinian enclave
Jun 5, 2025 Israeli opposition leader Avigdor Lieberman has accused Israeli forces, under the approval of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, of arming crime families” in Gaza.
The accusations add weight to the claim that Israel has used Palestinian gangs to disrupt the distribution of aid in the besieged enclave.
Israel has provided assault rifles and light weapons to crime families in Gaza, on Netanyahu’s orders,” Lieberman, the head of the Yisrael Beiteinu party and a former finance minister and deputy prime minister, told Israeli public broadcaster Kan on Thursday.
The weapons are being transferred to criminals and offenders and are being directed at Israel.
In my opinion, it did not pass cabinet approval. The head of the Shin Bet knows, I’m not sure the chief of staff knows. We’re talking about the equivalent of Isis in Gaza,” he added, referencing the Islamic State group.
He added that no one can guarantee that these weapons will not be directed at Israel. We have no way of monitoring or tracking them.”
In response, Netanyahu’s office said: Israel is working to defeat Hamas in various ways, on the recommendation of all heads of the security establishment.”
There have been several reports in recent months of Israel allegedly backing, or turning a blind eye to, armed gangs looting aid and food warehouses in Gaza.
Several Israeli news websites reported on Thursday that the armed gang is led by Yasser Abu Shabab, a member of a large clan in southern Gaza.
Read also:
Eight killed as Israel bombs, bulldozes Jenin refugee camp
Citing unnamed defense sources, the Times of Israel reported that the weapons Israel provided Abu Shabab’s gang included some that Israeli forces seized from Hamas during the war.
Hamas officials told Reuters that Abu Shabab was wanted for collaborating with the occupation against his people”. The officials said Hamas fighters had killed at least two dozen of Abu Shabab’s men before January, after they had allegedly looted aid trucks. Al Jazeera Arabic’s Anas al-Sharif reported in early May that Israeli forces attacked shopowners and local Gaza security teams who were attempting to protect shops from looting and chaos.
Asaad al-Kafarna, a police officer in Gaza, was killed by Israeli forces near a restaurant on 2 May after pursuing armed looters accused of collaborating with Israel’s military.
In response to such looting by gangs, a number of influential families in Gaza published statements denouncing the scenes. These gangs act in alignment with the goals of the occupation,” the Madhoun family wrote at the time.
In November, an internal UN memo obtained by the Washington Post revealed that gangs may be benefiting from a passive if not active benevolence” or protection” from Israeli troops.
One such gang leader, according to the memo, established a military-like compound” in an area restricted, controlled and patrolled” by Israel’s military. Commentators have suggested that by backing criminal gangs and targeting members of Gaza’s civil administration, Israel was attempting to create a power vacuum and lawlessness.
Massacres of aid seekers A CNN investigation published on Thursday concluded that the Israeli military was behind a deadly shooting of civilians seeking aid near Rafah in southern Gaza over the weekend, which killed more than 30 people.
Read also:
Israel’s Deepening Involvement with Syria’s Rebels
More than a dozen eyewitnesses, including those wounded in the attack, said Israeli troops shot at crowds in volleys of gunfire that occurred sporadically through the early hours of Sunday morning, the investigation said.
Multiple videos geolocated by CNN placed the gunfire near a roundabout where hundreds of Palestinians had gathered about half a mile (800 metres) away from the militarised aid site.
The Israeli military has denied its troops fired on civilians in or around the centre, and both it and the aid centre’s administrator accused Hamas of sowing false rumours. The controversial US-backed initiative to distribute aid, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), said on Thursday it would not hand out any food to starving Palestinians for a second day, saying operations will only restart when maintenance and repair work at its distribution sites are complete.
The suspension of the GHF’s aid distribution system comes after more than 100 Palestinians were gunned down near its sites in less than a week.
Earlier this week, eyewitnesses and local officials told Middle East Eye that Israeli troops opened fire directly on civilians, with many of the fatalities receiving gunshot wounds to their head or chest.
We remind our readers that publication of articles on our site does not mean that we agree with what is written. Our policy is to publish anything which we consider of interest, so as to assist our readers in forming their opinions. Sometimes we even publish articles with which we totally disagree, since we believe it is important for our readers to be informed on as wide a spectrum of views as possible.
Even though India gives shelter to nearly 20 million undocumented people from neighbouring countries like Pakistan, Nepal, Tibet, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Bangladesh, the Union government in New Delhi always remains aggressive towards the illegal migrants (termed infiltrators, asylum seekers or refugees) from Pakistan since the days of independence. But lately, both the government and people of the south Asian nation have taken an united stand against the Bangladeshi nationals and Rohingya people from western Myanmar too, projecting them as security threat and instigators of demographic changes as well as social unrest. The dramatic change took place soon after the Pahalgam terror attack in the Kashmir valley, where 26 innocent civilians were brutally killed by the Islamists with suspected backing from the Pakistani regime in Islamabad.
Soon after the 22 April Pahalgam incident, a massive wave of public outrages was observed across India demanding a decisive retaliation against Pakistan. It followed an escalation of armed conflicts between the two neighbours and New Delhi launched Operation Sindoor targeting the terrorist hideouts inside the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and mainland Pakistan. A bilateral understanding for cessation of armed conflicts was accepted on 10 May, but enormous furies against the enemy nation continues among the majority of Indians. Even the Supreme Court came out heavily against the government for taking a longer time to deport the illegal migrants. The apex court also recently rejected a plea to stop the process of deportation involving Rohingya Muslim migrants. It also refused to hear a petition on alleged dumping of 38 Rohingya people in Andaman Sea near to the Myanmar coast, terming it a ‘very beautifully crafted story’.
The particular petition claimed that New Delhi deported those Rohingyas even after possessing identity cards from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). They were reportedly brought to Sri Vijaya Puram (earlier Port Blair), headquarter of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands in the Bay of Bengal, from Delhi in the first week of May and abandoned them on a ship with life jackets in the Myanmar coast with assurances that someone would rescue them. A civil society group named People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) even condemned the alleged deportation of Rohingyas describing it inhumane and illegal under domestic and international guidelines.
The new found Rohingya menace prompts New Delhi and other province governments to take visible actions against the individuals either entering India illegally or staying after the expiry of their visa periods. The Rohingyas to the tune of 40,000 are staying in Telangana, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Jammu & Kashmir with other localities. Those Muslim residents from Rakhine (Arakan) province of Myanmar faced brutal military crackdowns in 2016 and 2017, following which over 700,000 Rohingyas fled to neighbouring Bangladesh. Their return became challenging following the military coup in February 2021 and subsequent armed conflicts between the Myanmar military junta and ethnic armed outfits including the Arakan Army.
The Border Guards Bangladesh (BGB) alleged that India had sent over 2000 individuals into Bangladesh since 1 May with no official intimation. BGB director general Ashrafuzzaman Siddiqui claimed that many Bengali speaking Indian Muslims were also pushed in through the borders of West Bengal, Assam and Tripura. The political leaders, security experts and general population expressed serious concern over the incidents of pushing people through land borders and terming the process illogical and illegal. They questioned the deportation of Rohingyas to Bangladesh, as they are not citizens of the country, but Myanmar. The BGB officials detained at least five United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) recognized Rohingya refugees, who were pushed by the Indian agencies.
Dhaka made it clear that it would accept individuals only after the confirmation as Bangladeshi citizens and repatriated through official channels. The Bangladeshis demanded to stop the practice, levelling it as a threat to their sovereignty, even though the Rohingyas entered India from their territory only.
Meanwhile on 23 May, the UNHCR issued a media statement from Geneva, where it expressed concern over two reported boat tragedies leading to the death of over 400 Rohingya refugees at Myanmar coast. The UN refugee agency stated that around 514 Rohingyas travelled on two separate boats, where one carried around 267 people. Over half of them probably departed from Rohingya refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar of south Bangladesh and the rest left Rakhine province of Myanmar. The boat sank on 9 May, where only 66 survived. Another boat carrying 247 Rohingyas (gathered from both Cox’s Bazar camp and Rakhine localities) capsized on 10 May, where only 21 survived.
The dire humanitarian situation, exacerbated by funding cuts, is having a devastating impact on the lives of Rohingya, with more and more resorting to dangerous journeys to seek safety, protection and a dignified life for themselves and their families,” said Hai Kyung Jun, regional director of UNHCR, adding that the ‘latest tragedy is a chilling reminder that access to meaningful protection, especially in countries of first asylum, as well as responsibility sharing and collective efforts along sea routes, are essential to saving lives’.
UNHCR also called on the international community to stand in solidarity with the countries in the region which are hosting Rohingya refugees. Until the situation in Rakhine becomes peaceful and conducive to safe and voluntary return, the international community must continue to support efforts to provide life-saving assistance to Rohingya refugees. The UN agency reportedly requires $ 383.1 million in 2025 to stabilize the lives of refugees and their host communities across Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and those displaced inside Myanmar. So far, only 30 percent of this amount has been received, it added.
IF OTHER LAWS EXISTED TO PROTECT CHILDREN THERE WAS NEVER A NEED TO HAVE 365 OR 365A OR FOR THE GOVT TO STRENGTHEN IT IN 1995 & 2006.
THIS IS THE ONLY 2 SECTIONS THAT SPECIFY SAME-SEX SEXUAL ABUSE & PROTECTS MINORS – IT IS SHAMEFUL THAT ADULTS ACTUALLY WANT TO PUT CHILDRENS LIVES IN JEOPARDY NOT UNDERSTAND THE REAL SITUATION ….
When ‘Discrimination’ demands Freedom to have Sex (carnal intercourse) against the Order of Nature in Public: A Critical Look at LGBTQIA Demands on Penal Code 365 & 365A. Are LGBTQIA Rights Truly Being Denied? Advocates of rights” and freedoms” for the LGBTQIA community frequently claim they face discrimination under Sri Lanka’s existing laws—particularly Penal Code Sections 365 and 365A, which pertain to carnal intercourse against the order of nature and gross indecency. However, these accusations are rarely backed by concrete evidence. The claims are emotional, vague, and often fail to define what specific rights are being denied.
Let us ask plainly:
What constitutional or civil rights are LGBTQIA individuals denied that are not denied to anyone else?
Are they refused education, employment, healthcare, or the right to vote?
In reality, LGBTQIA individuals in Sri Lanka have held, and continue to hold, positions of prominence and influence. Many have served as Presidents, Prime Ministers, First Ladies, Foreign Minister, Ministers, MPs and have excelled as business owners, entrepreneurs, bankers, retailers, educationists, entertainers and human rights activists. They participate fully in society—socially, economically, and politically. This does not reflect systemic exclusion or persecution. They have become who they are with the existence of Penal Code 365 & 365A. There is no tangible evidence to prove that Sections 365 and 365A have resulted in systemic persecution or exclusion.
So, what is the real grievance?
If the only complaint is that the law prohibits specific sexual acts—acts which apply to all individuals regardless of identity, including heterosexuals—then the argument is not about rights at all. It is about seeking legal permission for behaviors that most societies, especially in the East, deem immoral or unacceptable.
Such demands cannot be dressed up as human rights claims, because they are not about access to basic needs or protections. They are about redefining morality, eroding child protection, and legitimizing sexual conduct as identity politics—with no clear social benefit to the wider population.
International Definitions and Interpretations
Carnal Intercourse Against the Order of Nature
General Meaning:
The phrase carnal intercourse against the order of nature” is a legal term traditionally used in many Commonwealth countries’ penal codes to criminalize sexual acts deemed unnatural or immoral by historical or cultural standards. This typically includes anal or oral sex and bestiality (sex with animals)
Legal Origins:
The phrase is largely derived from British law, particularly from the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885, which criminalized unnatural offences.” Many former British colonies retained similar language in their penal codes.
Gross Indecency
General Meaning: Gross indecency” is a broader and more vague legal term historically used to criminalize sexual acts that are considered immoral or indecent but may not fall under specific categories like rape or sodomy.
Legal Origins:
This term was notably used in British law, for example in the Labouchere Amendment (1885) which criminalized gross indecency” between men, used to prosecute Oscar Wilde.
The term was intended to capture sexual acts that fell short of sodomy but were deemed immoral, including acts committed in private or public.
International Legal Context:
While the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention have increasingly advocated for the decriminalization of consensual same-sex sexual acts—framing criminalization as a violation of international human rights, including the right to privacy and freedom from discrimination—these positions primarily reflect Western liberal ideals. Such calls often lack concrete grounding when viewed through the lens of diverse cultural, religious, and social values, particularly in Eastern societies. They tend to focus narrowly on sexual activity itself, disregarding the rich heritage, moral frameworks, and community norms that have strengthened & improved Penal Code Sections 365 and 365A. This raises critical questions about the imposition of universal standards without adequate respect for cultural sovereignty and local societal values.
Understanding Real Discrimination vs. Misusing the Term for Immoral Demands
The public must be able to differentiate between actual discrimination and manipulative misuse of the term. Discrimination is when a woman is denied a job because she is a divorcee. It is when a person with a physical disability is refused employment. It is when a rape victim is shamed and ostracized by society. These are real, tangible forms of injustice that affect an individual’s dignity, survival, and basic human participation.
But demanding the right to engage in public sex, to legalize carnal intercourse against the order of nature, or to challenge laws that protect minors from sexual abuse—as currently covered under Penal Code Sections 365 and 365A—cannot and must not be equated to discrimination. Such demands have nothing to do with denial of access to education, employment, housing, or public services. Rather, they seek legal permission to normalize sexual behaviors that the vast majority of societies—especially in Eastern cultures—deem immoral, indecent, and socially harmful.
Equating laws that uphold public morality and child protection with discrimination” is a dangerous distortion. It not only devalues the struggles of those who face real oppression, but it also opens the door to undermining legal safeguards against indecency, exploitation, and sexualization of society—including children.
Interpretation Variability:
Different countries interpret carnal intercourse against the order of nature” differently. In some jurisdictions, it may apply broadly to all non-penile-vaginal sexual acts, while others specify acts like anal sex or bestiality.
Despite no verifiable evidence of discrimination, there is a concerted push by advocacy groups to demand the rewriting of Penal Code Section 365 and the complete repeal of Section 365A. Yet, both these sections do not deal with discrimination; they specifically address carnal intercourse against the order of nature and gross indecency.
Are we to accept that consensual acts labeled as carnal intercourse against the order of nature” are themselves discrimination against the LGBTQIA community?
Are we to presume that acts deemed grossly indecent” fall under discrimination claims?
If so, where do we draw the line between private conduct and public order?
Penal Code Sections 365 and 365A exist not to target any community, but to protect public morality and vulnerable groups—especially children. These laws are designed to prohibit carnal intercourse deemed unnatural and acts of gross indecency, particularly where they could involve or be committed in the presence of minors.
So, we must ask:
Are we now to believe that protecting children from exposure to or involvement in same-sex carnal acts or gross indecency is a form of discrimination” against the LGBTQIA community? How can legal safeguards intended to shield minors from sexual exploitation be reframed as an infringement on adult sexual freedoms?
This inversion of logic leads us to a disturbing reality: The real discrimination is being committed against Sri Lanka’s 6.1 million children.
Does the Human Rights Commission & the many children’s activists who were intervening petitioners in favor of repealing 365A care about the child?
By attempting to repeal or weaken Sections 365 and 365A under the guise of promoting rights,” these advocacy campaigns are in fact dismantling critical legal protections that exist to prevent same-sex sexual abuse of minors. This is not progress—it is regression wrapped in a human rights slogan.
Child protection is not negotiable. No advocacy—no matter how global, well-funded, or politically supported or threatened with denying loans/aid or trade concessions—should be allowed to compromise the safety, dignity, and future of children. If the demand for so-called rights” comes at the cost of a child’s protection, it ceases to be a right—it becomes a threat.
If these sections are repealed or rewritten, does that imply permission or acceptance of public sexual acts or indecent behavior in public spaces? Should society tolerate sexual acts—consensual or otherwise—in public areas simply because a particular community demands it and a bunch of diplomats, foreign funded organizations & individuals & media are promoting it? What about the impact on families, children, and the general public who expect laws to uphold decency & morals?
Are these legal provisions being mischaracterized by advocacy groups as discriminatory, when in reality they regulate behavior deemed unacceptable by societal standards? Could the real issue be about redefining morality & spreading immorality & destroying our society & individuals rather than addressing discrimination?
Furthermore, can we deduce that some demands from within this community effectively push for normalization of sexual acts with minors, considering the language of these sections?
In the 1980s, Sri Lanka became infamous as a beach boys’ paradise” where young boys were exploited by foreign pedophiles. Has the country forgotten this shameful chapter? Are we prepared to repeat history by removing the very legal protections that were strengthened in the 1990s and 2006 to prevent such abuse?
Repealing these laws under international pressure:
Invites paedophilia under the cloak of consensual behavior.”
Normalizes public sex actsand gross indecency in spaces shared by families, children, and religious communities.
Undermines Sri Lanka’s moral fabric, cultural values, and legal sovereignty.
Final Questions for Society
Should laws protecting children and public morality be repealed because a few NGOs, foreign diplomats, or funded media campaigns demand it?
Are we willing to tolerate public sexual acts or paedophilic interpretations of freedom” simply because they are masked as rights?
Who speaks for the majority? Who defends the child?
Any attempt to rewrite or repeal Penal Code Sections 365 and 365A must begin with a fundamental question: Are we protecting human dignity, or undermining it?
If the cost of legal reform is the erosion of morality, decency, and child protection, then it is not reform at all—it is societal sabotage. Let us not trade our children’s innocence for Western-imposed ideologies cloaked in the language of rights. Let us not call immorality progress.”
In conclusion, before repealing or amending laws, it is vital to thoroughly examine the actual nature of the claims, the evidence presented, and the broader societal consequences. Without clear distinctions between legitimate rights and conduct regulations, the debate risks endorsing actions that undermine both social order and child protection.
We call upon lawmakers, civil society, religious heads and every concerned citizen to stand firm in defense of Sri Lanka’s moral values, legal sovereignty, and child protection. Let us not bow to ideological coercion. Let us protect what truly matters.”
The proposed $3.7 million oil refinery to be built by China’s Sinopec in Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port is facing significant delays over multiple issues like dispute over equity structure, tax concessions, market access, and allocation of land for the project.
The inland port is built in a natural harbour near the town of Hambantota in the district of the same name on the southeastern coast of Sri Lanka, located 250 kilometres from Colombo. Unable to repay its debt, Sri Lanka gave China a controlling equity stake and a 99-year lease for Hambantota port, which it handed over in December 2017.
In the pact signed on January 16, 2025, during the visit of Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to Beijing from January 14 to 17 following his visit to India in December 2024, China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation, or Sinopec, the world’s biggest refinery, agreed to expand its economic and energy footprints by building a massive oil refinery in Hambantota.
The agreement promised a facility capable of processing 2,00,000 barrels of crude oil per day. Incidentally, the Sri Lankan government had originally envisioned a 1,00,000 barrels per day refinery when Expressions of Interest (EoI) were called. While hailed by Sri Lankan officials as a landmark foreign investment, the deal had raised deep concerns about sovereignty, environmental integrity, and long-term economic independence.
This expansion had raised red flags with China controlling a major deep-water port and a potential mega refinery. However, the project in Sri Lanka is considered a top priority at Sinopec. The refinery is planned adjacent to the Hambantota port that China Merchant Port Holdings controls, on a 99-year lease.
The refinery project in Sri Lanka is a move by the top Chinese and global refiner to secure more markets overseas. The Sinopec investment was cleared in November 2023 during the term of Dissanayake’s predecessor, Ranil Wickremesinghe. Under debt-trap diplomacy, China woos foreign leaders and signs deals, which are dual-use in nature.
The original Request for Proposal (RFP) had stipulated foreign equity to be capped at 20 per cent and mandated 80 per cent of the projected output per day to be earmarked for exports. However, Sinopec is seeking a larger equity share and dilution of the 80 per cent export obligation to enable it to gain wider access to the domestic market in Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka authorities have, till now, ruled out any changes in the RFP. Separately, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) has raised concerns that unrestricted market access for Sinopec could severely disrupt the petroleum sector in Sri Lanka and adversely affect energy security.
The Sri Lankan government had initially offered 500 acres of land for the project in Arabokka, Hambantota, and Sinopec subsequently requested an additional 200 acres of land just 3.5 kilometres from the Chinese-controlled port.
The authorities concerned are yet to decide on the quantum of land to be allocated, and there is also the related issue of lease duration for the land to be allocated. Hence, no formal agreement has been reached in this regard. Meanwhile, the Central Environment Authority (CEA) had issued the terms of reference to Sinopec to carry out an environmental impact study and submit the report to it.
The President’s Media Division (PMD) has issued an official statement highlighting a serious procedural irregularity involving the release of a prisoner from Anuradhapura Prison, who was not approved under the presidential pardon granted for the 2025 Vesak festival.
According to the PMD, W.H. Athula Thilakaratne, an inmate serving a sentence for financial fraud, was released despite not being included in the list of prisoners approved by the President for a general pardon.
The PMD clarified that under Article 34(1) of the Constitution, the President has the authority to grant pardons to convicted prisoners.
Accordingly, a list of prisoners selected by the Prison Superintendents is forwarded to the Ministry of Justice.
The list is examined by the Ministry of Justice and then sent to the Presidential Secretariat. With the approval of the President, those prisoners are granted a general pardon, the PMD stated.
In this instance, the official list—submitted by the Commissioner General of Prisons on May 6, 2025—included 388 names.
However, the name of the individual imprisoned at Anuradhapura Prison in connection with financial fraud was not included in that list.
This individual was not included in the list of 388 prisoners granted a presidential pardon,” the PMD stated.
In light of this development, the Presidential Secretariat lodged a formal complaint with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) yesterday (June 6), under the title Release of a Prisoner without Presidential Approval under the Presidential Pardon.”
The PMD further confirmed that a formal investigation has been launched, and disciplinary measures will be taken against any officials found responsible for the irregular release.
The realms of quantum physics and spirituality, though seemingly disparate, have intrigued thinkers, scientists, and spiritual leaders alike due to their overlapping inquiries into the nature of reality. Quantum physics, the science of the very small, delves into the fundamental particles and forces that compose the universe, uncovering phenomena that challenge our traditional understanding of matter and existence. Spirituality, on the other hand, seeks to understand the nature of consciousness, existence, and our place within the universe. We will explore the relationship between quantum physics and spirituality, highlighting how each can inform and enhance the other.
Quantum Physics: A Brief Overview
Quantum physics is a branch of science that describes the behavior of matter and energy at the quantum level, including atoms, photons, and subatomic particles. Key principles include:
Wave-Particle Duality: Particles such as electrons exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties, challenging classical notions of distinct particles.
Superposition: Particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously until observed, as demonstrated by Schrödinger’s cat thought experiment, which presents a scenario where a cat is both alive and dead until observed.
Entanglement: Particles can become entangled, meaning the state of one particle is instantly connected to the state of another, regardless of distance. This phenomenon, famously termed spooky action at a distance” by Albert Einstein, suggests non-locality in quantum mechanics.
Uncertainty Principle: Formulated by Werner Heisenberg, this principle states that certain pairs of physical properties, like position and momentum, cannot both be measured precisely at the same time.
These concepts fundamentally challenge our classical understanding of reality, suggesting a universe that is interconnected and probabilistic at its core.
Spirituality: A Brief Overview
Spirituality is a broad and multifaceted concept that involves seeking meaning, purpose, and connection beyond the material world. Key elements include:
Interconnectedness: A belief in the interconnectedness of all things, often encompassing a sense of unity with the universe, nature, or a higher power.
Transcendence: The pursuit of experiences that transcend ordinary life, leading to higher states of consciousness and understanding.
Inner Peace and Awareness: Practices like meditation and mindfulness are central to spirituality, promoting self-awareness, inner peace, and a deeper connection with oneself and others.
Search for Meaning: Spirituality involves exploring existential questions and seeking deeper meaning and purpose in life.
The Relationship Between Quantum Physics and Spirituality
Interconnectedness and Non-Locality
Quantum entanglement suggests that particles can be instantaneously connected across vast distances, defying classical notions of separateness. This idea resonates with spiritual beliefs in the interconnectedness of all things, where the universe is seen as a web of interconnected relationships. Spiritual traditions emphasize the unity of all life and the universe, reflecting the non-local connections found in quantum physics.
The role of the observer in quantum mechanics, where measurement affects the state of a particle, raises questions about the nature of consciousness and reality. This aligns with spiritual views that consciousness plays a fundamental role in shaping our perception of reality. Some spiritual philosophies suggest that consciousness is a primary aspect of existence, a concept that finds intriguing parallels in the observer effect of quantum physics.
Both quantum physics and spirituality explore the unknown and the mysterious. Quantum physics describes a universe ruled by probabilities and uncertainties, challenging traditional, deterministic views. Similarly, spirituality often embraces the mysteries of existence, encouraging exploration and acceptance of the unknown as part of the journey toward enlightenment and understanding. Combining these two fields could lead to an altered state of mind, representing a new level of evolution where humanity and technology merge. We are already more than halfway there. Just walk down the street or ride the subway, and observe how many people are so engrossed in their smartphones that they barely notice the world around them.
Quantum physics and spirituality both promote holistic approaches to understanding reality. Quantum theory suggests that particles are interconnected and part of a larger system, while spirituality emphasizes the holistic nature of existence, where everything is interconnected and interdependent. This holistic perspective encourages a more integrated view of science and spirituality, where each can inform and enrich the other.
How Quantum Physics Can Enhance Spirituality
Quantum physics offers a framework for understanding the universe that aligns with many spiritual principles. By highlighting the interconnectedness of all things and the role of consciousness, quantum physics can provide a scientific foundation for spiritual beliefs. This integration can deepen spiritual practices, encouraging a more profound sense of connection with the universe and a greater appreciation for the mysteries of existence.
How Spirituality Can Enhance Quantum Physics
Spirituality can offer quantum physics a broader context for understanding the implications of its discoveries. By emphasizing interconnectedness, consciousness, and the search for meaning, spirituality can inspire new ways of thinking about quantum phenomena and their implications for humanity. This interdisciplinary dialogue can foster a more comprehensive understanding of reality, bridging the gap between science and spirituality.
The intersection of quantum physics and spirituality offers a rich and transformative perspective on the nature of reality. By exploring their shared themes of interconnectedness, consciousness, and mystery, we can develop a more holistic understanding of the universe and our place within it. This synthesis of science and spirituality not only deepens our appreciation for the complexity and beauty of existence but also inspires new pathways for personal growth, discovery, and enlightenment. As we continue to explore this intersection, we may uncover new insights that illuminate both the material and spiritual dimensions of life.
Sri Lanka is once again standing at the edge of a political and national security precipice. A bold and disturbing statement made by Member of Parliament Archuna inside Parliament has triggered ripples far beyond the chamber’s walls. Facing death threats and legal retaliation, he stood firm and declared truths the nation can no longer afford to ignore.
A Bombshell in Parliament
MP Archuna, under threat and likely political expulsion, dropped a bombshell:
323 containers of arms and weapons—originally assembled in Thailand for Prabhakaran in 2009—have now reached Sri Lanka through KP.”
He admits he cannot yet provide documentary proof, but he asserts full responsibility for the claim, placing accountability for his words on the record.
More alarmingly, he revealed:
The President’s pre-election trip to Germany involved meetings with LTTE-linked diaspora groups.
Assurances were given that could not be delivered, causing undisclosed tensions.
A second visit to Germany is imminent, and Archuna alleges it is tied to funding provided by these same diaspora networks.
The Government’s Reaction: Silence and Suppression
Instead of investigating these serious allegations, the Government appears focused on silencing the messenger. Archuna has been summoned to court on 26 June, with efforts reportedly underway to remove him from Parliament.
The Deputy Speaker forced him to publicly reaffirm accountability, but the issue has not been probed further. What does the Government plan to do?
LTTE Glorification vs. Silence for the True Heroes
Archuna claimed that Tamils continue to annually honor LTTE heroes” on November 27, while the backbones govt is refusing to even utter the word Ranaviruwo” in respect to Sri Lanka’s war heroes.
Those in uniform tell me I am at least speaking the truth. But the Government they voted for doesn’t even respect them,” Archuna stated.
This silence is not accidental—it is political appeasement.
Unmasking the Bigger Picture: A Pattern of Betrayal
Sri Lanka has seen this playbook before 1970s–80s: Indian Intelligence trained Tamil militants in secret camps across India.
1983: Carefully choreographed Black July manipulated the world into seeing a Sinhala-Tamil ethnic war, when in truth, many Sinhalese sheltered Tamils. The incident was weaponized to justify armed militancy.
2002: Over 50 military intel officers exposed and killed after Millennium City betrayal under a UNF government.
2009: President Mahinda Rajapaksa ended 30 years of terrorism in just 3 years.
2015: Regime change & ouster of President Mahinda Rajapakse weakened the military:
Intel officers arrested, camps closed.
Military sidelined, demoralized.
Islamist networks ignored, leading to the Easter Sunday massacre in 2019.
Two suicide bombers were sons of a man on the JVP national list—a connection that has never been thoroughly investigated.
A New Wave of Violence: A Diversion?
In the wake of MP Archuna’s revelations, the country is witnessing a disturbing rise in underworld killings and public shootings. This pattern eerily mirrors past efforts to distract the public, create fear, and redirect scrutiny away from political scandals.
Are we, once again, being steered into a choreographed crisis? Is the resurgence of chaos just a smokescreen to bury deeper truths?
The Nation must now Demand Answers
The public, civil society, and opposition must rise above political divides to ask critical, urgent questions:
Are 323 containers of arms truly in Sri Lanka?
If yes, where are they?
Who authorized their entry & who released them & why?
What exactly transpired in the President’s meetings with the LTTE diaspora?
Was there foreign campaign financing – what was promised?
Why is a sitting MP being persecuted for raising national security concerns?
Is Parliament no longer a place of free speech?
Why does the Government remain silent about military demoralization?
Why are those who ended terrorism treated with such contempt?
Why are past incidents like Easter 2019 still unresolved?
Who dismantled the intelligence networks that could have stopped it?
Sri Lanka must choose between Truth and Repetition
If what MP Archuna has said is even partially true, Sri Lanka faces a renewed internal threat, one far more dangerous than open war—a betrayal from within. The cost of silence is once again being measured in lives, fear, and sovereignty.
We cannot walk into another 30 years of bloodshed!
This is not the time for silence. This is the time for accountability, courage, and national unity. Let the truth come out—whatever it may be.
Sri Lankans deserve answers. And the world must stop pretending that terrorism ended in 2009 just because the battlefield fell silent. The terrorists & separatists continue their agenda in different disguises.
The death of Ngugi wa Thing’o on 28 May 2025, the great Kenyan writer and the greatest among the East African writers, towering giant in African Literature brings a profound personal grief to me. Reasons are many. I have translated Ngugi’s classic, AGrain of Wheat” (first published in 1967) into Sinhala in 1999 (Revised second print in 2020) with a lengthy introduction running for 42 pages titled, Uhuru Flame” and some of his short stories including Money Galore” in 2008 (title story of the anthology of translated African short stories). My translation of Ngugi’s epic novel Petals of Blood” (1977) remained unfinished due to some practical problems.
Furthermore, in many of my writings and literary discussions I have elucidated Ngugi’s contributions as an academic, a writer and a revolutionary thinker, who used his novels, theatre and other writings to critique British colonialism and post-colonial Kenyan politicians and politics whom he described as Black Imperialists” and the death of hopes, the death of dreams and the death of beauty” respectively.
It is deeply regretted that no media outlet in Sri Lanka -electronic or print- has reported his passing not even with a brief obituary even after a week has passed. They were completely absorbed in a beauty pageant held in Thailand, creating an illusion for gullible viewers and readers that crowning country’s contestant was a moment of national triumph. Unfortunately, she was not even among the top forty despite the congratulatory messages from the President and other top politicians who attempted to make it a political issue. When a Thai beauty was crowned our TV anchors had no shame in declaring it as a triumph of a Theravada Buddhist country!
It should be noted that in those days we obtained information about African Literature in the most challenging way importing books, critical essays and literary journals from various publishing houses in London utilizing our own funds. It was only from the 1990s the worldwide web made the internet accessible to the general public when websites and browsers have become common.
In the introduction of the revised edition of the translation of AGrain of Wheat”I am happy to state that I was able to discuss Ngugi’s new works of non-fiction and autobiographical works such as Something Torn and New: An AfricanRenaissance” (2009), ”Globelectics: Theory and the Position of Knowing” (2012), In the Name of the Mother, Reflections on Writers and Empire” (2013) and Dreams in a Time of War: A Childhood Memoire” (2012), (describing his school days during colonialism, Mau Mau and Emergency), In the House of theInterpreter: a Memoire” (2012), (his Alliance High School days), Birth of a Dream Weaver:A Writer’s Awakening” (2016), (his Makarere University College days) and Wrestling With the Devil” (his prison life) respectively.
The massive novel he wrote after a lapse of fourteen years Wizard of the Crow” (2007) depicts Africa’s present tragedy, set in thefictional Free Republic of Aburiria”, recognizable as modern Africa. This was also a translation from his native Gikuyu language translated by the author himself. In 2020 Ngugi published his poetic narrative, ThePerfect Nine: The Epic of Gikuyu and Mumbi”, that narrates the story of Gikuyu and Mumbi, the founders of the Gikuyu tribe who sought noble suitors for their ten beautiful daughters. It is a mix of myth, folklore and Kenyan traditional lyrical literature, which reminds us a Buddhist Jataka Tale.
The first article on Ngugi in Sinhala was written by the late Susil Sirivardena in Mawatha (No. 6) when Ngugi was imprisoned by the Jomo Kenyatta government in 1978. It was a historical travesty the person who fought for Kenya’s independence from British colonialists, who himself was a creative writer (I have translated his TheGentlemen of the Jungle” into Sinhala, a scathing denunciation of British, French, Portuguese, German and Belgian colonialism), author of Facing MountKenya”, the first treatise on African culture considered as a text of cultural nationalism”, independent Kenya’s first Prime Minister (1963-1964) and then the President (1964-1978), lauded as the Burning Spear” of the freedom struggle, Father of the Nation”, imprisoning a literary giant like Ngugi.
Ngugi’s few short stories were translated into Sinhala and appeared in a periodical. Bobby B. Boteju included translations of two short stories written by Ngugi in his collection of African short stories titled Nisa Geethaya” (1992). This writer was invited to deliver the keynote speech at its launch.
Ngugi’s epic drama jointly written with Micere Githae Mugo, The Trial ofDedanKimathi” was produced and staged by the late Somalatha Subasinghe in 1977. Its Sinhala version was staged as Yadam”. This play brings back to life the murdered Mau Mau (Kenya Land and Freedom Army) freedom fighter Dedan Kimathi. But after the initial performances they failed to sustain audience attention perhaps due to lack of audience interest, production challenges and mainly political content of the play. Unfortunately, it failed to capture the revolutionary heroism of the protagonist. Being a versatile actress and a playwright are not enough to stage a powerful political play such asDedan Kimathi”.
Its songs were entirely in Gikuyu language. After the show the audience joined in the final triumphant dance and went in marching along the streets of Nairobi singing songs featured in the play. This play was staged in Lagos in 1977 at the Second World Black and African Festival of Arts and Culture” (FESTAC).
Although Ngugi published his first novel Weep Not Child” in 1964, the first Sinhala translation of Ngugi’s novels appeared only in 1993 with Matigari”, his sixth novel, which was originally written in Gikuyu, translated by the author himself into English and published in 1986. Naravila Patrick was its translator.P.B. Jayasekeratranslated into Sinhala in 1997, Weep Not Child”and Ngugi’s fifth novel Devil on the Cross” the first novel Ngugi wrote in Gikuyu, translated by the author himself into English and published in 1982. The translation of Ngugi’s first novel, The River Between” (published in 1965) translated by Sunanda Mahendra was serialized in Irida Divaina” in 1984.
This shows a lacuna in Sinhala translation works. Many of the translators of African Literature undertook their translations without having an overall knowledge of the writers and their works, how a writer’s creative abilities, thinking and his/her worldview evolved from his/her formative years. Translators were induced by others who provided the text to them. Otherwise Matigari” cannot be the first Sinhala translation of Ngugi’s novels.
In 1984 I had a tussle with a Sri Lankan professor as he wrote introducing James Ngugi as a Nigerian writer who had worked at the Nigerian Radio. When I corrected this error, he replied to me complete with academic arrogance that although Ngugi was born in Kenya he was a Nigerian writer and as he was his friend, he likes to call him James Ngugi! I only knew that the Nigerian writer Achebe working at the Nigerian Radio. It’s true that Ngugi was baptized as James Ngugi and all his earlier works carry that name.
But in March 1970 when Ngugi was addressing the fifth congress of the East African Presbyterian Society saying that he was neither a man of the Church nor a Christian, an old man raising his walking stick warned him to confess for the abomination and pray to the Lord that the speaker was a Christian and his name James bear testimony to it. Ngugi until that time did not realise that his personal name presents a contradiction, is tainted bystigma and undermines everything he professes. Ngugi took his father’s name Thiong‘o Wa, published his Homecoming: Essays on African and Caribbean Literature, Culture and Politics”under the new name Ngugi wa Thiong’o in 1972. It’s very strange that his Sri Lankan friend” was unaware of Ngugi’s name change even after fourteen years!
Not to be outsmarted he even sent a photocopy of a book cover carrying the name James Ngugi to the press! This overenthusiastic friend” miswriting Mau Mau, as Mao Mao said that Ngugi was a staunch member of Mau Mau, which was totally incorrect. Ngugi was a student when the liberation struggle broke out in 1952. Although some students had helped Mau Mau fighters as scouts and movement of military supplies and provisions Ngugi had regretted that he did not get such an opportunity to support the forest fighters. His half-brother was involved in Mau Mau and killed, hismother tortured by the home guards, his house reduced to ashes. But he never forgot his peasant roots. He worked in pyrethrum fields owned by the European settlers. Petals of Blood” is the story of the pyrethrum cultivators, its white petals turning red!
In 1998, a Sanatorium Writer” in the USSR days writing to a Sinhala daily said that British book publishers and book sellers induced African writers likeAchebe and James Ngugi rewarding them and turning their creations into a form of esoteric merchandise. Again, I had to intervene in defense of Ngugi and Achebe. A funny part of these dialogues was a Peradeniya academic pointing out Swahili as a language spoken in Nigeria! Swahili is a language most commonly spoken in East Africa. There can be Swahili speaking people coming to Nigeria for business!
The first and the most comprehensive critical perspective on Ngugi was written by his former professor at the Makarere University College (later university) Uganda, David Cook in 1982. Can we Sri Lankans imagine a university professor writing a book about a student except a blurb in a back cover of a book?
Ngugi was not only a writer. He was a literary and a cultural critic, a theoretician in literature and culture. The only other African revolutionary writers who can be compared with him were Sembene Ousmane of Senegal (referred to as the father of African cinema”) and to a lesser degree Alex La Guma of South Africa. At the demise of Ousmane in 2007 I wrote an article illustrating his literary and cinematic career describing him as the African writer who gave a voice to those which have been struggling over centuries of colonial yoke to regain their voices and their languages. Writer of nearly a dozen of novels in French at one stage, like Ngugi he stopped writing in French and turned into his native Wolof instead. The Ugandan poet Okot p’ Bitek first wrote his major poem Song of Lavino” in Luo language; he later translated it into English.
Until the emergence of Ngugi what was considered as African Literature was the literature produced in West Africa, especially in Cameroon and Nigeria and Ghana written in French and English languages respectively. Within a short period, he became a towering figure in African Literature and received worldwide acclaim. He became the most talked about writer and critic in African Literature because of his ideas regarding what language African Literature be written in. African Literatures were written in the languages of the colonialists English, French and Portuguese respectively.
We have discussed this aspect in four articles published in The Island” in February-March 2020 participating in a dialogue on Cross-Writing initiated by our friend Prof. Wimal Dissanayakeciting Ngugi’s seminal work Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature”.
Influenced by the writings of Marx and Frantz Fanon, the ideology Ngugi expressed in his literary works and critical essays was vastly different from that of other African writers. As a person who translated some masterpieces of Chinua Achebe, Wole Soyinka, Mariama Ba and some other African writers into Sinhala I am very clear about this. His writings reflected his leftist, revolutionary ideals. His voice most often was for the emancipation of the Kenyan, African and Black people in general, a voice denouncing keeping masses in bondage, against exploitation and oppression, a clarion call for returning land expropriated from Kenyan peasants. His voice was anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist and a voice against Black Elites” who usurped power after gaining nominal independence from the British, French, Belgian and Portuguese colonialists respectively.
The political solution he envisioned was a peasant revolution, to replace black capitalists and capitalism with African Socialism. These ideas were expressed vividly in his epic novel Petalsof Blood” which narrates Kenya’s historical development from feudalism to capitalism and the beginning of neo-colonial honeymoon. Ignominious plunder of capitalism, theft, corruption, treachery, accumulation of new wealth, in short plunderers gathering the fruits of Uhuru” (freedom) tree are brilliantly depicted in Devil on the Cross”. Its culmination was portrayed in Matigari”, the story of a fictitious freedom fighter of Mau Mau fame emerging from the forests and roaming in the countryside in disguise; an allegory that a man has arisen to give life to the liberation struggle; for freedom arms that were fallen from the hands of old militants must be grabbed by the present generation.
People were searching for a man called Matigari”whom they thoughta returnee Mau Mau freedom fighter from the jungles. People gathered in motor parks, beer shops and other public places to hear both novels Devil on the Cross”and Matigari”read in parts.Kenyan police hearing that a person called Matigari”was roaming in the countryside organizing the peasantry and people were talking about him, deployed an extensive search to track down and capture him. Later after discovering that Matigari”was a fictitious character they raided all book stores and seized books available for sale and banned its sale in Kenya.
Thus, as Chinua Achebe, Ngugi had compiled a chronological account of his country’s modern history. The other noteworthy aspect of his writings was exploring Mau Mau as his central theme. In AGrain of Wheat”, a Mau Maudetainee Gikonyo returns to his village to find his wife Mumbi raped by a home guard and carrying a child. Central theme of this novel is finding the betrayer of Kihika, the leader of village freedom fighters.
Origins our own Goni Billas” in 1988-89 can be traced to Special Branch agents who helped the British forces in the screening and capturing ofMau Mausympathisers. They were dressed in huge hoods with eye-holes who were known as Little Sacks” or Gakunia”.
To understand Ngugi’s vision, militancy, and his views about the use of languagein African literature, Africannationalism, culture and liberation a treasure houseis open with his critical writings, Detained: A Writer’s Prison Diary”, Writers in Politics”, Barrel of a Pen”, Homecoming: Essays on African and Caribbean Literature, Culture and Politics”, Decolonising the Mind: the Politics of Language in African Literature”.
InMoving the Centre: The Struggle for Cultural Freedoms”, Ngugi emphasizes the emancipating culture from Euro-centrism. He elaborated the need to move the centre from its assumed location in the West to a multiplicity of centres of the world, in short freeing culture from Eurocentrism.
All hell broke loose with the staging of the play I Will Marry When I Want” jointly written in Gikuyu in 1977 by Ngugi and Ngugi wa Mirii. To expose the corrupt regime and neo-colonial exploitation, disillusion of people, Ngugi went in search of a new audience. That was the reason he chose his native language instead of writing in English. This play was written with the inputs given by peasant masses. Old Mau Mau fighters and villagers participated in the writing and revising the text, adding songs and dances, refining the language and changing metaphors and similes. It was said that its traditional opera songs were written with the help of an illiterate peasant woman who choreographed the dances to the songs. Ngugi wrote later that he understood the power of collective work and its creativeness with this play. Mingling with the people he got the feeling of a new man, emancipating himself from decades of alienation caused by colonial education.
It contained songs of Mau Mau fighters and their Oaths. Theatergoers went back to their homes singing songs of the play as in a demonstration. The government banned the play. The playhouse was attacked and burnt. Ngugi was imprisoned without a trial on December 31 1977. First draft of Devil on the Cross”was written while he was in prison, ironically on toilet paper. Ngugi wrote later that for prisoners to add injuryto their punishment a course toilet paper was provided. He was released in December 1978 by Kenyatta’s successor Daniel Arap Moi, a Home Guard who collaborated with the British Army in the suppression of Mau Mau fighters, their sympathizers and kith and kin. Ngugi was removed as the professor of English at the Nairobi University. Then began his self-exile, first to England and then to America. His co-writer Ngugi wa Mirri died in exile in Zimbabwe.
This brings to the fore the question of which language should be used for creative writing to serve the masses. Ngugi disliked calling literature written in thelanguages of the colonialists English, French and Portuguese by African writers as African Literature. He was convinced as far back in 1969 that writing in English had no value. He said that using colonialists’ languages what African writers have created was a Euro-African or an Afro-European literature.
In an interview given in 1969 Ngugi said that I have reached a point of crisis. I don’t know whether it is any longer writing in English. The problem is that I know whom I write about. But whom do I write for ? The problem he had to resolve was the problem of audience, for whomhe was writing. With the beginning of writing in his native Gikuyu he found who were his actual audience. At the time of writing Petals of Blood” he became more and more disillusioned with the use of a foreign language to express Kenya’s soul and the social conditions in Kenya”. He said that people should express their national aspirations and their national history in the various national languages of Kenya, like Gikuyu, Luo, Girima, Kambi and Masai, all part and parcel of Kenya’s national culture.
Although Ngugi’s novel Petals of Blood” written in English, considered as a proletarian novel, an uncompromising, merciless denunciation of the ruling class and its cronies, blistering condemnation and exposure of their sellout, it did not provoke them and they did not take any action against him. But rulers became panic only after he began to write in Gikuyu.
As stated earlier the first novel Ngugi wrote in Gikuyu was Devil on the Cross”. That was also the first novel written in Gikuyu. It was a big challenge for him to use a language which did not have a modern novel. He wrote later that he learnt his language anew; while writing the novel, rediscovered its creative essence and the power of collective word. Switching into Gikuyu was not an easy task although it was enriched with traditional or oral literature as any other African language.
Critics said that the use of Gikuyu has released previously untapped aspects of Ngugi’s creative talent and he has achieved remarkable success in two languages writing in Gikuyu and translating the same into English.
He told in 1980, one of the greatest tragedies of Africa is a complete disconnection of the elite from their linguistic base”. In reality because of language what happens is that the messenger who is sent by the community to go and fetch knowledge from wherever they can get it becomes a prisoner. He never returns, so to speak metaphorically because he stays within the language of his captivity”.
A cynic may argue that these are old grannies’ tales that we Sri Lankans have passed that age in the 30s or 40s. But no one can deny that at present thanks to our education system Sri Lanka producing hordes of alienated young people who do not have any knowledge of our native languages, history, literature and culture. Future belongs to them, including politics!
The most notable struggle Ngugi was involved in the academic field culminated in renaming the English Department as the Department of Literature in 1968. Making Africa the focal point shedding dominancy of Euro-centric culture and literature was its aim.
Most of the African writerscontinue to write in acquired languages English, French and Portuguese respectively despite the argument that African Literatures should be written in African languages. Writing in their native languages is a big risk as they cannot reach a wider audience across Africa and beyond. Roughly 750 languages are identified in Africa. The most populous state in Africa, Nigeria has about 400 languages. Not all writers have the luxury of translating their own works as Ngugi to a language of the colonialists.
The most prestigious and the oldest international journal of African Literature founded in 1968, African Literature Today” had to dedicate its No 41 issue (2023) titled African Literature in African Languages Today” to explore African Literature in African languages. It says the dominance of African Literature written in European languages over those in indigenous languages continues to be an issue. It reexamines the often-asked question what is the state of African Literature written in African languages”.
Isn’t it a supreme irony that illiterate peasants portrayed in African novels who do not either speak or understand the oppressors’ languages speaking in English, French or Portuguese?
An academic in Dar Es Salam University, Tanzania used the term Translingualism to discuss Ngugi writing in his native language and translating them into English, addressing the relationship between translation and minor languages.
Did anyone of our English writers stop writing in English and start writing in either Sinhala or Tamil? Instead there are many failures who tried to pose as English writers. Did any academic in Sri Lanka champion linguistic decolonization and cultural authenticity?
African literature cannot be understood properly merely reading a novel of Chinua Achebe or a novel written by a writer of younger generation, may be of 3G, such as Chimamanda Ngozi Adichi or a crude and vulgar Sinhala translation of Achebe.
Announcing the death of Ngugi, his daughter Wanjiku wa Ngugi in a Facebook note said, he lived a full life, fought a good fight”.
e–Con e-News wrote that our English Departments appear to know very little of Ngugi. A contributor to the same web journal wrote that I had the honour to meet him, (we felt we were in the shade of a giant tree), at a commemoration he organized for the Ugandan poet Okot p’ Bitek whose work I have shared before. Kenya is just across the seas from Sri Lanka and links with that great country should not be left to traders, nor should African countries be used as synonyms for failure as our English-colonized media (AI or not) led by BBC continually do. The Dynamite and Missile Makers refused Ngugi their Nobel prize which he deserved, not once but several times, if that is a measure of quality, but luckily it isn’t. Our artists continually fail us for they fail to plumb the depths of our past to understand the challenges to build a modern future.”
Two university dons at Peradeniya writing articles on Soyinka’s A Play of Giants” and Achebe’s Anthills of the Savannah” respectively was a big news to be included in an article titled, The English Department and the University” (in More Open Than Usual? (1992)). One wag questioned who cares a writer who has written more than 50 articles on African Literature in both Sinhala and English.
What would be the position of Ngugi if he were born in Sri Lanka? In addition to state repression he would be hounded by the academia and the NGO aristocracy as a racist, Gikuyu-athiest supremacist influenced by Victorian morality” and Protestant-Buddhism”, a Gothrikaya” (tribalist), who attempts to take back Sri Lanka to the stone age; a person who deprives others of good things in civilization, literature or other aspects of culture, a censor, a cultural policeman, having learned Shakespeare and Conrad himself!
“Free” critical thinking, in a philosophical sense, refers to the ability to think independently, without being unduly influenced by external pressures or internal biases. It involves questioning assumptions, analysing information objectively, and forming reasoned judgments based on evidence and logic. Essentially, it’s about thinking critically for oneself, rather than passively accepting information or opinions.
Keeping in line with the ethos of what Venerable Rahula stood for all his life, his guiding beliefs, ideals and practice of what he believed in, primarily the freedom to think critically and look at what Buddha taught from the prism of Bahujana Hithaya, Bahujana Sukaya (for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many”), a commemorative event was held to celebrate the 118th birth anniversary of Venerable Walpola Rahula on the 24th of May at the Sri Lanka Foundation in the presence of a large and distinguished gathering. The event witnessed a renaissance of those ideals and beliefs so eloquently expressed by the keynote speaker at the event Professor Nirmal Ranjit Devasiri, from the department of History Faculty of Arts University of Colombo, specialising in social transformation in agrarian societies, history and ideology, European colonialism in Asia, post-colonial state-building, and ethno-nationalism.
A panel discussion that followed, with eminent panellists that included Venerable Galkande Dhammananda, head of the Walpola Rahula Institute, Chulananda Samaranayake, one of the major translators of internationally acclaimed literary books, a poet of four anthologies of poetry and an author of a book of short stories, Dr Sunil Wijesiriwardena, literary critic, academic, researcher, civil activist, university lecturer, poet, writer, author, playwright, and Professor Prabha Manuratne, the discussion moderator who is engaged in interdisciplinary research focusing on violence and representations of violence, and with expertise in English Studies, Film Studies, and Cultural Studies. She is also an activist who works on women’s rights and education rights in Sri Lanka
The general opinion at the end of the evening’s proceedings was that the intellectually enriching, and ideologically incisive dialogue and discussions at the event should be continued by the Walpola Rahula Institute as a fitting tribute to a person who was an embodiment of free and critical thinking, Venerable Walpola Rahula. In keeping with the Buddhist framework of the Walpola Rahula Institute, and the ongoing project of the Walpola Rahula Institute, Heta Bhikshuwa (tomorrows Monk) it was felt that a broader discussion based on the Bhikshuwage Urumaya (Heritage of the Buddhist Monk) authored by Ven Walpola Rahula who encouraged free critical thinking by individuals to consider information and arguments without being swayed by personal biases, emotions, or external pressures, questioning assumptions, examining the logic of underlying arguments, openness to diverse viewpoints and a willingness to consider alternative interpretations of information, would be most appropriate.
Some critical issues were raised during the event. The near dogmatic adherence to traditional Buddhist conventions without consideration of their historical context, and the practice of contemporary conventions introduced and spearheaded by institutionalised Buddhism, as well as the governing status quo, both, misinterpreting and misrepresenting the historical context and also basing contemporary conventions on narrow avenues of thought by a few, rather than through a broad-based consultative approach. Free and critical thought was an anathema to those responsible for promoting dogmatic adherence and for those misrepresenting and misinterpreting historical context, as well as the governance status quo dominated by a few.
Another issue raised was the need to consider why institutions such as the education system as it is understood today, came into being with education catering to economic, social and political dictates rather than for the acquisition of knowledge.
Within the space of time available, Professor Devasiri, in his presentation titled Struggle for free education, Bhikkhu politics in the 1940s and in contemporary Sri Lanka”, elaborated on the seeds as it were, and the growth of the movement for free education led by radical thinking persons both within the Bhikkhu order and amongst lay persons. Free education was seen as a means of upward social mobility, especially for the middle class of the country and the upper layers of the lower middle class, all of whom probably lived a life without much hope for them and their future generations. It was also viewed by many within the upper middle class and sections of the ruling elite as a threat to their influence and their way of life sustained by the existing way of governance.
Reportedly, a rhetorical question had been posed to the chairman of the education commission at the time, C W W Kannangara, by a senior government political figure as to who would pluck coconuts if there was upward social mobility of the masses as a consequence of free education!
Paradoxically, even some within the Buddhist Monk establishment had issues with free education as it was seen as challenging the status quo relating to traditions and the traditional education ethos, which formed the power and influence base of some senior Monks in the hierarchy of the Buddhist establishment.
However, as pointed out by Professor Devasiri, the extensive support primarily from the lower strata of society, as well as some liberal minded individuals from the upper middle class, and of course a large number of Monks from the Buddhist establishment had provided an unstoppable impetus towards free education.
It was seen as a means of resisting colonial dictates supporting the exclusiveness of education to a select few and instead broad basing it as a means of unshackling them from social impediments the masses were facing. Venerable Rahula’s active association with the Vidyalankara Bhikkhu movement, which was seen as a departure from the historical traditional mindset and towards a more active participation of Bhikkhus in social and political issues in keeping with Buddha’s Rigveda based dictum of for the happiness of many and for the benefit of many”
Professor Devasisri also pointed out that historically, even going back to the Anuradhapura period, the Buddhist Monks had been the real power and influence amongst the people, and the effective unifying force eclipsing the power of Royalty in the country. Rejuvenation of this power, which had its ups and downs over decades, had begun consequent to the advent of colonialism in the country, especially British colonialism, and it gathered serious momentum during the struggle for free education. In the context of the enormous influence exerted by the Buddhist monk’s establishment, it was incumbent on them to use this influence and power wisely for the benefit of the people. A yet unsolved contradiction however appears to be there in so far as how this influence should be used by Buddhist Monks to address the contemporary situation of the country, which was different from the historical, tradition bound Sinhala Buddhist country which they took as the natural ruling order of the country.
The panel discussion further elaborated and examined the principal issues presented by Professor Devasiri. While Venerable Dhammananda, who had been the closest to Ven Rahula for decades presented a few anecdotes to illustrate Venerable Rahula, the human being, others raised issues like the rigidity of the education system which focussed on a stereotyped, discipline-based approach rather than acquisition of knowledge and with little room for free thinking. The narrowness of the relatively contemporary concept of dependent arising (Patticca Samuppadaya) was also highlighted. While Buddha’s concept behind dependent origination had been the inter dependency of many realities and circumstances which impacted and then resulted in a reaction or palaya, it was argued that it would be misleading to assign a narrowness to reason or the cause, which had a particular reaction or the palaya. This narrowness had originated from the more modernistic (scientific) view that every action was a linear development as the result of a cause taken in a very narrow sense. More thought provoking views on the role of Buddhist Monks, whether they should be divided into a monastic tradition and a social upliftment tradition or as it existed during Buddha’s time, whether both traditions should be a combined, single tradition, and looking at existence or samsara from a multi-faceted approach and questioning the why” and not limiting oneself to examining the how” as being important to humanity were presented.
As emphasised by all speakers, Ven Rahula espoused critical thinking as an attempt to understand rather than challenge or dispute the Buddhist doctrine. Buddha himself had maintained the dictum, come and see” or ehi passiko, meaning, question even the Dhamma and what the Buddha said in order to understand the Dhamma. The doctrine taught by the Buddha some two thousand six hundred years ago was carried on to many generations through an oral tradition after his death in 480 BCE, until it was written down in 25 BCE in Sri Lanka. While it is not a conclusive or definitive statement, it is natural that passage of time could influence the oral tradition and include interpretations of Buddha’s teachings. In this backdrop, a critical and questioning look at the Dhamma should be viewed as a logical exercise although it must be noted and understood that it should be done through the practice of the basic tenants of the Dhamma rather that doing it as an academic exercise, in order to fully understand and appreciate the Dhamma.
The full program of the event maybe viewed by following the link below.
Sri Lanka’s Sections 365 and 365A, enacted during colonial times and strengthened in 1995 and 2006, protect children from sexual exploitation, including same-sex abuse. Private consensual acts, where adults are involved, are not the issue—those can remain private as has been done over centuries. The real concern is the push by some groups to legalize and normalize public displays of same-sex behavior, which violate long-held public ethical standards and expose impressionable children to inappropriate content. This raises troubling questions: Do these advocates truly care about the welfare of children and society? Or is their agenda at odds with protecting future generations? This article unpacks the history, the current threats, and the urgent need to uphold these laws for the sake of child safety, moral values, and national integrity.
1. Origin and Purpose of Sections 365 & 365A (Colonial Era)
Sections 365 and 365A were introduced into the Sri Lankan Penal Code during British colonial rule through Ordinance No. 2 of 1883 (effective from 1885).
Criminalized carnal intercourse against the order of nature” with any man, woman, or animal.
Covered homosexual acts, bestiality, and certain heterosexual acts considered unnatural.”
Importantly, the original Penal Code did include an age threshold:sexual acts against the order of nature committed by an adult with a child under 16 were punishable with enhanced penalties, recognizing the need to protect minors.
Section 365A: Acts of Gross Indecency”
Criminalized acts of gross indecency between persons, whether in public or private.
Broadly targeted same-sex behavior, especially in public, but without referring to age or coercion.
Original Purpose:
To protect public morality and enforce moral codes.
To discourage public sexual acts considered indecent or disruptive to social values.
To criminalize acts thought to be against the natural order.”
To criminalize sexual abuse of minors, specifically under the age of 16, even in same-sex contexts.
2. 1995 Amendments (Act No. 22 of 1995): Introduction of Child Protection Measures
In response to rising global and national concerns over child sexual exploitation, Sri Lanka’s Parliament strengthened Sections 365 and 365A through Act No. 22 of 1995.
Key Changes:
Introducedstrict age protections:
If an offender is over 18 and the victim is under 16, the punishment became:
Rigorous imprisonment between 10 and 20 years
Mandatory fines
Compensation to the victim
This created legal safeguards for minors and treated child sexual abuse — regardless of sexual orientation — as a serious criminal offence.
This was not a relaxation but a reinforcement of the colonial-era Penal Code, recognizing that the existing legal framework lacked specific safeguards for minors—especially in cases of same-sex or coercive acts, which were otherwise unaddressed under separate child protection laws at the time.
Why this Amendment Matters:
Itclosed a critical legal loophole that left children vulnerable to abuse under the guise of private, consensual acts.
It appliedequally to all forms of carnal abuse, but explicitly recognized that same-sex sexual acts involving children needed targeted criminal penalties.
Importantly, the amendment retained the original scope of unnatural offences” butexpanded it to ensure child protection and public morality.
Public Understanding is Key:
Most citizens are unaware that this is the only section in Sri Lankan criminal law that directly criminalizes same-sex acts involving minors or adults. Its repeal or weakening would leave a dangerous legal vacuum, removing the only clause that:
Addressessame-sex crimes involving children,
Enforcesstrict age-of-consent protections,
Treatsnon-heterosexual child abuse with the seriousness it deserves.
Added legalrecognition of psychological trauma as a form of injury under Sections 365 and 365A.
Clarified thatmental and emotional harm could be compensated in court.
This reflected a growing understanding that sexual abuse causes deep psychological damage, not just physical harm.
4. What the Proposed Repeal Seeks to Do
The 2023/2024 draft Private Member’s Bill by MP P. Dolawatte seeks to:
Amend Section 365, replacing it with a clause that only criminalizes bestiality (sex with animals).
The proposal wishes to remove reference to unnatural acts between men and women. Meaning that unnatural acts between men & women are to be legal & not criminal.
Repeals Section 365A entirely, which criminalizes gross indecency, including same-sex acts — in public or private — and removes age-based penalties currently in place.
Dangers:
Removes protections for children under 16when engaged in same-sex acts with adults over 18.
Normalizes all same-sex behavior, even inpublic settings, regardless of public decency norms.
Reduces the state’s abilityto regulate sexual conduct harmful to public morals and child welfare.
If acts once regarded by law and society as ‘gross indecency’ were criminalized for violating public morals and protecting the vulnerable, what has changed today that warrants reclassifying them as decent or harmless?”
5. Who benefits from the Proposal, who is at risk?
Advantaged:
Advocacy groups seeking tonormalize same-sex relations in law and public life.
International agencies promotingDEI (Diversity, Equity & Inclusion) tied to LGBTQIA+ agendas.
Adults engaging in sexual relationships with minors, particularly in same-sex contexts — who would facelesser or no legal risk if age protections are removed. Paedophilia is virtually legalized.
Disadvantaged:
Children, especially those under 16, who would lose a vital legal protection from sexual exploitation from same-sex sexual abuse.
Parents and communitiestrying to preserve moral boundaries and protect childhood innocence.
Society at large, as legal and cultural lines between adult behavior and child safeguarding blur.
Why these Laws should be Preserved and Strengthened
The1995 and 2006 amendments show that Sri Lanka recognized the need to protect children and reinforce moral order. Private conduct was never criminalized then or now.
Repealing these sections entirely, as currently proposed, would:
Remove age protectionsfor minors.
Decriminalize public indecencytied to same-sex behavior.
Allowfuture normalization of acts that many cultures, including religious traditions, deem harmful.
Who Are the People Calling to Remove Legal Safeguards for Children?
It is critical that the Sri Lankan public and judiciary understand who is advocating to repeal or amend Sections 365 and 365A of the Penal Code — laws that were strengthened in 1995 and 2006 to protect children from sexual abuse, not to discriminate.
Why would anyone want to repeal clauses that protect children from adult predators?
Well, look no further than the list of intervening petitioners in 2023— a coalition of activists, NGOs, donor-linked professionals, gender ideologues, media influencers, foreign-funded lobbyists, and even a few claiming to work in child protection.
These Are Not Innocent Reforms — This is Legal Sabotage
Many of these petitioners hold positions as:
Child rights officers
Women’s rights activists
Public health advocates
Academics
LGBTQ+ lobbyists
Media & business figures
Yet none of them have explained why they support removing:
Theage threshold that punishes adults (18+) who commit sexual acts on minors (under 16),
The inclusion ofpsychological trauma” as a form of injury,
The right of child victims tocompensation under the law.
And not a single one of them has acknowledged that these protections were not part of the colonial version, but were added deliberately by the 1995 and 2006 Amendments to:
Fill a legal gap for protectingchildren from all forms of sexual abuse (not just penetrative),
Recognize mental trauma as real and compensable,
Impose deterrent sentencing on adult offenders —regardless of sexual orientation.
Disturbing Questions that must Be Asked:
If someone represents a child protection organization, why advocate removing clauses punishing child sexual abuse more severely for same-sex crimes?
If they are a women’s rights lawyer, why seek to decriminalize adult same-sex sexual acts—including male-male and female-female—with same sex boys or girls under 16?”
If a UN-backed gender advisor, is their role to protect victims or push global ideologies at the expense of national sovereignty and child safety?
The 1995 & 2006 Amendments Were Not About Discrimination — They Were About Protection
Let us be clear:
The laws today are not colonial leftovers. They have been modernized to punish adult exploitation of children. Removing them is not reform” — it is dismantling child protection.
The 100+ intervening petitioners must be held morally and legally accountable for supporting a move that:
Weakens child protection laws in particular related to same-sex sexual abuse,
Normalizes adult-child sexual conduct in same-sex contexts,
Eliminates legal recognition of mental trauma for same-sex sexual crime,
Undermines Sri Lanka’s cultural values under the guise of human rights.
Protecting Children and Respecting Cultural Values
Sri Lanka’s laws must balance private freedoms with public morality and cultural norms. While consensual acts between adults in private should remain unaffected, public displays of sexual behavior—especially those impressionable to children—must be carefully regulated to preserve childhood innocence and social ethics.
Safeguarding Against Exploitation
Repealing legal protections tied to sexual conduct risks creating loopholes that predators could exploit, endangering minors. Age-of-consent laws and child protection measures are essential to prevent abuse, regardless of sexual orientation.
Parents play a vital role in guiding children’s moral and emotional growth.
Scientific studies indicate that early exposure to sexual content, especially outside a stable family environment, can negatively impact mental health and emotional development. Research also shows a significantly higher percentage of individuals identifying as homosexual come from broken or disrupted family backgrounds compared to the general population, highlighting the importance of strong family structures in healthy child development.
Distinguishing Adult Rights from Child Protection
Advocating for adult private freedoms should not come at the expense of removing laws that protect minors from exploitation and harm. These protections are critical and non-negotiable.
Transparency and Accountability
The push to repeal these laws is often driven by foreign-funded groups and ideological agendas that may overlook Sri Lanka’s social priorities. Those advocating for change must be transparent and accountable, especially when children’s safety is at risk.
Lessons from the West: The Cost of Normalizing LGBTQIA Public Advocacy
Experience from Western countries shows that the widespread promotion and normalization of LGBTQIA lifestyles, especially when introduced early in schools and public spaces, has led to concerning increases in mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, and suicide rates among youth. Studies reveal that such early exposure can confuse children about identity before they are emotionally ready, often causing lasting psychological harm. As a result President Trump is now reversing the legislative changes made. This reality underscores why Sri Lanka’s 2006 amendments to the Penal Code, which recognize psychological trauma as a serious injury and protects children from premature exposure to sexual content, are crucial safeguards for the mental and physical well-being of minors.
Human Rights Commission Sri Lanka’s Push for Repeal: A Risk to Child Protection
Fully aware of all these ground realities on May 22, 2025, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) sent a formal letter to Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara, recommending the repeal of Sections 365 and 365A of the Penal Code. The Commission argued that these provisions, which criminalize same-sex relations, violate international human rights obligations, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). However, this recommendation raises concerns about the potential weakening of legal protections for minors. The 2006 amendment to these sections specifically enhanced penalties for sexual offenses involving individuals under 16, recognizing the severe psychological harm such acts can cause. Repealing these sections without careful consideration could inadvertently remove critical safeguards designed to protect 5.1million children from sexual exploitation and abuse. Why has the HRCSL completely disregarded the Human Rights of 5.1m children & the HR of majority of Sri Lankans who wish to continue 365/365A?
In conclusion when laws are weakened to accommodate identity politics, it is children who are sacrificed first.
To the petitioners and advocates pushing this repeal: Why do you support removing protections that no child has asked to lose?
