The United States (USA) currently faces one of its most critical challenges: the unchecked influx of undocumented individuals across its northern and southern borders. Over the past few years, an estimated 31 million undocumented people have entered the country, a figure significantly higher than the official “catch and release” numbers reported by the current administration, which stand at approximately 13 million.
According to the Department of Border Patrol (CBP), over 65% of border crossings (borders extending thousands of miles) go undetected, underscoring serious gaps in border security and immigration enforcement. Furthermore, intelligence reports have raised concerns that adversarial nations have exploited this porous border by sending an estimated two million individuals with criminal backgrounds and an additional one million military-age men for espionage and destabilization efforts within the United States. This is the 21st century―there is no safe and sovereign nation without secure borders.
The fiscal impact of this demographic shift is substantial. Roughly 20% of the nation’s healthcare (including Medicaid), welfare, and public education budgets are allocated to serving undocumented populations. These are hardly discussed in the mainstream media, but exaggerate how sinful deportations are. These expenses place a heavy burden on taxpayers and contribute to rising costs of living nationwide, as well as a disturbing rise in violent crime. Although undocumented immigrants represent less than 10% of the total U.S. population, recent data attribute 56% of violent crimes to this group. Such statistics illustrate profound implications for national security, public safety, and social cohesion.
The growing public concern is often met with resistance by certain factions who oppose deportation efforts. These groups—comprising activists, politicians, billionaire donors to disrupt society, and others—organize protests, as happened in Los Angeles last weekend, to prevent the arrest of violent criminals, engage in legal challenges, and even obstruct enforcement through judicial activism by a handful of ideologically motivated federal judges with lifetime tenure.
These obstructions to arresting and deporting known violent offenders compound the risks to community safety and, eventually, the sovereignty of the USA. Those who vehemently oppose deportation (many paid to do so) should, at a minimum, be made to bear the responsibility for housing and financially supporting them, and formally making them pay for the victims of crimes. An official legal approach is warranted for them if they do not want to deport criminal invaders, those trespassers with criminal records, rather than shifting these costs onto the general population.
The persistence of this crisis cannot be justified on social, economic, or security grounds. Alarmingly, many experts view it as a deliberate political strategy aimed at altering the electorate. By granting de facto citizenship (and driver’s licenses) and voting rights through backdoor mechanisms—as observed in states like California—political factions seek to secure a long-term voter base, thus perpetuating their hold on power at the expense of the nation’s stability.
Sri Lanka, as a smaller island nation with distinct cultural and social dynamics, must heed these lessons. Current proposals to allow visa-free access for South Indians in the northern regions and to resettle foreign populations in eastern provinces (already happening at a smaller scale) carry serious risks of repeating similar mistakes as in the USA. These measures threaten national identity and sovereignty, cultural heritage, enhance the economic downturn, and social harmony. For example, prior government decisions to relocate Maldivian nationals and some Bangladeshis brought in. They settled in the eastern regions of the NCP—under the guise of environmental concerns—but driven mainly by political interests—and have already contributed to rising social tensions, violence, and unrest in the mentioned region.
Sri Lanka’s leadership must undertake a comprehensive assessment of the long-term consequences of immigration and population resettlement policies. Stop favoring ethnic minorities for short-term political gain that ends the harmony and peace within the nation. Prioritizing national unity, preserving cultural traditions, maintaining social stability, and safeguarding sovereignty should be paramount objectives. Failure to act decisively could lead to divisions and disruptions akin to those currently seen in the United States, jeopardizing the nation’s future peace and prosperity.
By Chaturanga Pradeep Samarawickrama Courtesy The Daily Mirror
The Colombo Port, long considered the economic heartbeat of Sri Lanka, is heading towards a ‘natural death’ due to mismanagement at the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA), Co-Convenor of the Joint Alliance of Port Trade Unions (JAPTU) Shyamal Sumanaratne warned.
Speaking at a special media briefing yesterday in Colombo, Sumanaratne questioned whether President Anura Kumara Dissanayake is fully aware of the deteriorating state of affairs within the Ports Authority and the looming crisis surrounding the East Container Terminal (ECT).
Sumanaratne alleged that under the current administration, the SLPA has fallen into disarray, plagued by poor leadership and stalled projects. Despite sending six letters to Ports Minister Bimal Ratnayake and the Deputy Minister highlighting these issues, no responses have been received to date, he said.
He welcomed the recent removal of the Managing Director of the Ports Authority who previously served as the Project Director for the Eastern Container Terminal, but urged further action, over the departure of an experienced Ports Board member with crucial maritime expertise.
The trade union leader further accused SLPA’s current administration of misleading President Dissanayake by claiming that the Eastern Container Terminal would be ready for opening by June 30. In reality, Sumanaratne said, the terminal’s launch could be delayed by another year and a half.
He attributed this to a series of detrimental actions under the current leadership, including the transfer of key administrative officials, the cancellation of tenders, and the halting of critical procurement processes. Notably, the tender for the purchase of ‘Straddle Carriers’ essential equipment for container operations was cancelled after the new administration assumed office and has yet to be reissued. According to Sumanaratne, it would take a minimum of 200 days to acquire this equipment once an order is placed.
He also noted that essential infrastructure, including computer systems, transportation equipment, and the recruitment of trained personnel for terminal operations, remains incomplete. Additionally, work on the terminal’s route has reportedly been suspended on the recommendation of a committee appointed by the Deputy Minister of Ports.
The NPP government promised so much to port workers, but not a single promise has been delivered,” he said.
The media briefing was also attended by Thushari Priyanka, President of the National Employees’ Union; Indika Samarawickrama, President of the Free Employees’ Union; and Dickson Gomez, President of the United Employees’ Union, among other union representatives.
However, when this newspaper contacted Eng. Hedigallage to find out about the US$ 1 million payment to RMA Energy for the consultancy service provided for this project, and also to know how Dr. Siyambalapitiya could change his stance regarding RE addition to the grid after assuming duties as Chairman CEB, the former accused this newspaper of slinging mud at him
All these unacceptable explanations are given perhaps for two reasons. The first could be to conceal their inability to manage the system and the second reason is because a group of CEB officials connected to the diesel mafia are heavily losing their ‘income’ when electricity is generated from solar
When purchasing solar power, we- the CEB — pay them with rupees whereas we have to pay in dollars when purchasing coal or diesel power to procure the fuel. Just because this group of CEB Engineers are receiving commissions from this coal and diesel generation, but not a cent from solar generation, they opt to purchase power generated from coal and diesel,” sources said
By Nirmala Kannangara
Startling revelations have come to the fore as to how the present administration of the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) is attempting to promote thermal and coal power by curtailing renewable power generation.
For the first time in the history the CEB, it has switched off all rooftop solar plantsa over 100kW and instructed all rooftop and ground mounted solar system owners to switch off their inverters voluntarily to ensure the reliable and stable operation of the national grid during recent New Year season. The CEB claimed that this decision was taken due to the significantly low demand observed in the system.
However, most of the roof top solar owners disregarded this unusual directives. It is now reported how the CEB Engineers have forcibly entered ground mounted solar farms in many parts of the country during the festive season and switched off their inverters from 9am to 4pm for five consecutive days.
Giving various unacceptable explanations as to why Renewable Energy (RE) has to be curtailed, the CEB maintains that this curtailment was facilitated to maintain an adequate level of dispatchable generation and improve sufficient system inertia.
All these unacceptable explanations are given perhaps for two reasons. The first could be to conceal their inability to manage the system and the second reason is because a group of CEB officials connected to the diesel mafia are heavily losing their ‘income’ when electricity is generated from solar. When coal and thermal generations are minimised, these vested parties do not get their ‘commission’ as solar generation does not benefit them although it benefits the country. This is the first time orders were given to switch off not only roof top solar inverters, but also ground mounted solar as well,” a highly reliable source from the Sustainable Energy Authority told this newspaper.
Development Master Action Plan
Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority (SLSEA) and the CEB drafted the ‘Renewable Energy Development Master Action Plan (REDMAP) 2023/ 2026’ in 2022 highlighting the importance in adding renewable energy (RE) to the national grid, especially from wind and solar. This was part of the Long-Term Generation Plan (LTGEP) that was drafted in line with the government’s policy to target achieving 70% RE by 2030, and to ensure timely implementation of RE additions to the system. CEB’s decision to ignore the instruction given in these reports and purchasing diesel and coal at a higher cost has raised eyebrows amongst their own engineers.
When purchasing solar power, we- the CEB — pay them with rupees whereas we have to pay in dollars when purchasing coal or diesel power to procure the fuel. Just because this group of CEB Engineers are receiving commissions from this coal and diesel generation, but not a cent from solar generation, they opt to purchase power generated from coal and diesel,” sources said.
As per the REDMAP, the proposed plan was to generate 1,795MW solar and 575 MW wind and other RE from 2023 to 2026. Having issued a report as such, what was the reason for the CEB to curtail RE and go ahead with costly thermal and coal power?
When drafting the REDMAP, Consultancy service to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) was provided by the Resource Management Associates (Pvt) Ltd (RMA) which is also known as RMA Energy, which was headed by the present Chairman of CEB Dr. Thilak Siyambalapitiya until September 2024 and presently by his wife.
RMA Energy provides consultancy services to ADB and World Bank (WB) on the country’s power sector. Having recommended to add more RE generation to the national grid at the time the report was drafted, this decision was ignored once he became CEB chairman and he wanted to purchase costly coal and thermal power by curtailing RE generation. It was even alleged that he was attempting to tender rooftop solar and ground mounted solar which is less than 10 MW for an unknown reason,” the Sustainable Energy Authority source told on condition of anonymity.
As per the CEB and Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) official data, from the time the REDMAP was issued and up to now only 793 MW Solar plants have been commissioned, a figure which includes rooftop solar units.
US$ 1 million paid
According to sources, it was the ADB that gave the grant to prepare this report ‘Way Forward of Integration of Renewable Energy Resources to the National Grid from 2023 to 2026 by Means of Appropriate Business Models’. Director General Power Sector Reform Secretariat and member of the Energy Committee, Eng. Pubudu Niroshan Hedigallage, has made a status most on his Face Book account, adding that US$ 1 million has been paid to RMA Energy for the consultancy services provided.
However, when this newspaper contacted Eng. Hedigallage to find out about the US$ 1 million payment to RMA Energy for the consultancy service provided for this project, and also to know how Dr. Siyambalapitiya could change his stance regarding RE addition to the grid after assuming duties as Chairman CEB, the former accused this newspaper of slinging mud at him.
I know who is behind this mud slinging campaign. You can write anything you want, but I am not scared of mud slinging,” Eng. Hedigallage said.
Meanwhile questions have been raised as to how Dr. Siyambalapitiya’s wife Namalee Siyambalapitiya continued to work for RMA Energy in the capacity of director even after the former had resigned from his post to accept CEB Chairmanship.
RMA earns hundreds of thousands of Dollars from these consultancies annually related to Sri Lankan power sector. What sought of conflict-of-interest policy has he adopted before he took over office at CEB? Has he divested of his interest in RMA Energy? Has his wife divested of her interest in RMA Energy? Have they resigned from all operations of RMA Energy and handed over the RMA Energy Management and technical control of the company? Since RMA is currently consultants to Offshore Wind Power on pre-feasibility assessment, have they recused themselves from this engagement or any project related to the country’s power sector? Is Tharaka Siyambalapitiya who is the senior project engineer of this company an offspring or a relative of the CEB Chairman?
Conflict of interest
Though the NPP government that assumed power promised to put a complete stop to all frauds, it has not lived up to its promises and appointed Dr. Siyambalapitiya to the CEB with such conflict of interest in place at CEB – the den of corruption,” sources alleged.
Questions have been further raised whether the decision to curtail solar power generation was due to ‘the rapid’ increase in rooftop and ground mounted solar and other inverter base Non-Conventional Renewable Energy (NCRE) plant installation which has resulted in substantial frequency fluctuations owing to low system inertia which becomes critical during disturbances leading to the frequent activation of the Under Frequency Load Shedding (UFLS) scheme and increasing the risk of tripping major thermal power plants? The SLSEA has said that the CEB should reveal to the consumers as to why frequency fluctuation is reported now and never before.
They claim that after the country’s economic recession, the demand for electricity has gone down steadily while rooftop and ground mounted solar parks have come up in numbers and these additions to the national grid is the cause for the frequency fluctuation. Before Dr. Siyambalapitiya took office there were no concerns for the safety and stability of the national grid, but it’s only now that they talk about a risk of tripping major thermal and coal power plants. Why is this?” sources alleged.
Deputy General Manager (System Control) CEB, Eng. M.B.S. Samarasekara by letter dated November 12, 2024, to AGM (Transmission Non-Wired Operation) has informed that immediate mitigatory actions must be taken to improve system demand and system stability during weekends and holidays with high NCRE penetration to the system.
***This letter ***further states, ‘This is to bring to your attention a matter of significant importance regarding the stability and reliability of the Sri Lankan power system, especially considering the rapid increase in rooftop solar plant installations and other inverter base NCRE plants.
‘The rapid increase in rooftop solar installations has introduced significant irregularities to the operations of the power system. This issue is particularly severe during long holidays, especially on sunny Sundays when industrial and commercial demands are exceptionally low. On these days, many dispatchable plants are not dispatched to accommodate the must run NCRE generation, resulting in substantial frequency fluctuations due to low system inertia. This problem becomes critical during disturbances, leading to the frequent activation of the UFLS scheme and increasing the risk of tripping major thermal power plants, particularly the Lakvijaya power plant.
‘On September 22, 2024, the system’s minimum demand of 670 MW occurred around 10.53hrs. During this period system operators observed significant fluctuations in system frequency, even the machine loads were adjusted. Consequently, it was necessary to curtail available NCRE (inverter based) generation to avoid further demand reduction and improve system inertia by adding more generation plants. The lowest recorded demand in 2024 at 670 MW prompted the curtailment of approximately 160 MW of NCRE between 10 and 15.00hrs to prevent system demand from dropping further to 600 MW. This curtailment has facilitated to maintain and adequate system inertia. Following the curtailment system demand increased to 820 MW, allowing for the dispatch of higher inertia plants in order to enhance system stability and resilience.
‘It is noted that the system frequency is experiencing rapid fluctuations and instability especially during daytime when the demand is exceptionally low. This instability is alarming and indicates the need for immediate mitigative actions, such as the incorporation of fast frequency arresting solutions into the system as soon as possible.
‘It is noted that during extremely low demand periods with the increasing of non-dispatchable renewable energy sources have compelled the National System Control Center (NSCC) to shut down more dispatchable plants, resulting in a significant reduction in system inertia. This loss of inertia substantially increases the risk of a total system collapse in the event of any system faults or disturbances.
‘Given these challenges, it is unlikely that the system can maintain resilience during such incidents.
‘As an immediate step to mitigate low demand risks, it is suggested to introduce new tariff rates of the industrial category on weekends and special holidays could encourage increased electricity usage on these low demand period until the proposed power system ancillary services are in place. By offering incentivised rates industries would be motivated to shift more operations to these days to help improve system demand and enhance the grid stability and resilience.
‘The investigation into operating large hydro power plants such as Victoria, Kothmale, Samanalawewa, Uma Oya and New Lakshapana in synchronous condenser mode reveals a promising opportunity to enhance grid stability and reactive power support. With the recent installation of Automatic Voltage Regulators these plants have the potential to operate effectively in this mode. Notably, New Lakshapana has the necessary infrastructure for synchronous condenser operation established during its refurbishment, though this capacity has yet to be fully utilised. Implementing this mode across these hydro plants could significantly strengthen grid stability by providing crucial reactive power without generating active power.
‘Evaluating the feasibility of operating Gas Turbine Generator 7 (GT 7) in synchronous condenser mode presents a promising opportunity to enhance system inertia and stability. As GT 7 has the highest inertia constant (H constant) in the Kelanitissa thermal fleet, operating it in this mode would allow it to provide essential reactive power and stabilise frequency fluctuations without generating active power. This approach could lead to a notable improvement in system resilience and ultimately strengthening overall grid stability under varying demand and supply conditions.
‘It is imperative to prioritise the installation of fast frequency reserves and energy storage systems such as battery energy storage systems (BESS), fast acting Gas Turbines, Flywheel Energy Storage Systems etc. These systems can provide the necessary rapid response to frequency deviations, thereby enhancing the stability and reliability of the power system.
‘These recurring low demand periods (especially holidays with good sunny and windy environment) highlight the critical necessity for an NCRE control desk with forecasting and monitoring facility at the National System Control Center and respective Distribution Control in order to effectively ensure grid security within permissible limits. Therefore, the implementation of an NCRE control desk should be given priority.
‘The spinning reserve requirement has to be reviewed accordingly when more NCRE is added, as a hot spinning reserve of 5% may not be satisfactory to maintain the system stability and reliability in future.
‘In future major generation contributions will be generated from NCRE sources and may require curtailments. Therefore, a proper mechanism for curtailments has to be formulated for future NCRE additions (at least for above 5MW scale).
‘Additionally, it is advisable to evaluate the minimum operating power and ramp rates for both hydro power plants and the CEB thermal power plants. This assessment will ensure sufficient capacity to accommodate additional power plants within the system, resulting in a significant improvement in system inertia.
‘Accordingly, please make immediate arrangements to effectively tackle these challenges and ensure resilient operation even during power system disturbances. This requires the timely commissioning of fast frequency response sources and the outline of alternative methods such as a new tariff category for low demand periods and the operation of existing plants in synchronous condenser mode where feasible. These measures will help stabilise the grid and improve system resilience’.
Stability and reliability
Although Eng. Samarasekera’s said letter has recommended to take certain steps claiming their ‘significant importance regarding the stability and reliability of the country’s power system’, the suggested decisions should have been implemented by the CEB before this situation occurred.
Their deliberate failure cannot penalise either the consumers or investors. The prevailing least cost long term generation expansion plan approved by the PUCSL contains 20MW/50Mwh battery storage in 2024, 100MW/400MWh batter storage in 2025 and a further100MW/400MWh battery storage in 2026. CEB has not taken any action to have these storage facilities in place and now recommending having battery storage facilities. The consumers and investors should question the CEB why the energy storage systems and synchronous machine in the generation plan was not implemented by CEB,” sources added.
Even though Eng. Samarasekara has proposed many ways to face this challenge in his letter, the management has selected switching off existing Solar and curtailing the future expansion of Solar catering to the requirement of Thermal Mafia citing various technical reasons, it is learnt.
When we contacted Eng. Samarasekera to find out why the CEB is interested in promoting thermal and coal generation and why he has requested to formulate a proper mechanism to curtail for future NCRE additions, Samarasekera wanted this newspaper to get the information from CEB Spokesman Eng. Dhammika Wimalaratne.
When Eng. Wimalaratne was contacted regarding this matter he said that the CEB had requested all rooftop solar system operators to switch off their inverters from April 12 to April 21, with the utmost concern for the safety and stability of the national grid.
With the country being bankrupt and the economy shrunk, factories were closed down and the demand for electricity dropped significantly. However, in the meantime, due to low interest bank loans given for solar installations, the number of rooftop and ground mounted solar parks came up rapidly. As a result, solar power generation went up speedily and due to low demand, CEB had to shut down coal and thermal plants to balance the situation. The larger power plants provide a critical service to the grid called ‘inertia’, which helps keep the electricity frequency stable though solar or RE cannot provide such an assurance to the grid. Without adequate inertia, even a small problem can cause frequency problems, leading to partial or total blackouts. The demand on the national grid was reduced to as low as 1550 MW in the morning hours during the festive season. As a result, a surge in solar generation forced CEB to shut down large synchronous generators—such as hydro, and thermal plants—which are crucial for grid stability.
When asked whether the CEB and the Sustainable Energy Authority didn’t know what the future consequences would be, when drafting the LTGEP and REDMAP that planned 2, 728 MW renewable energy plants by 2026, Eng. Wimalaratne said that it should be asked from those who drafted these reports and that he cannot give a proper answer to it.
This is a good question, but it should be posed to those who drafted the reports. Without having battery energy storage system there is no way we can store the solar generated power. As the country faced the financial crisis, many factories and businesses were closed down and the electricity demand came down whereas the generation picked up after the banks gave low interest loans to install solar panels. Last December we got a loan from the ADB to set up 100 MW battery energy storage system. We hope that we will not have to curtail solar generation once this system is implemented,” he said.
According to him, only rooftop solar inverter owners were asked to switch off but not the ground mounted solar inverters.
Solar parks interfered with
Although Eng. Wimalaratne said so, several ground mounted solar companies on condition of strict condition of anonymity told this newspaper that CEB Engineers entered their solar parks forcibly during the festive season and switched off their inverters which has caused huge losses to their businesses.
We invested several billions of rupees for these projects. But due to the CEB’s arbitrary decision we lost around Rs.200, 000 per day. Who is going to compensate for this loss?” asked representatives of ground mounted solar companies.
According to Eng. Wimalaratne, until battery energy storage systems are installed, the national grid has to rely on large synchronous machines to supply inertia and ensure stability.
CEB Engineers have forcibly entered ground mounted solar farms during the festive season and switched off inverters
At present, Sri Lanka does not have this facility nor advanced solar inverters that can provide this support. Sri Lanka has over seven million electricity consumers, but a mere 100,000 have installed rooftop solar panels. When the grid becomes unstable, everyone has to pay the price,” he added.
Although Eng. Wimalaratne said that larger power plants provide a critical service to the grid to keep the electricity frequency stable though solar or RE cannot provide such an assurance, questions are raised why the Ministry of Energy is conducting pre-feasibility assessment stakeholder workshop to develop Offshore Wind Power potential in the country.
By letter dated March 5, 2025, Additional Secretary (Development and Procurement), Ministry of Energy, T. Prassanth has sent a letter to the Director General Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority inviting them to attend a workshop for the said workshop.
***The letter states, ‘The Ministry of Power and Energy along with the Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority implemented technical assistance from the World Bank to conduct studies towards developing offshore wind power potential in Sri Lanka.
‘The study was conducted by Pondera Consult, an experienced international offshore wind consultancy based in the Netherlands in collaborating with their national counterpart, RMA Energy.
We are pleased to inform you that, as communicated, a follow-up workshop is organised to present the pre-feasibility findings.****
CEB maintains that this curtailment was facilitated to maintain an adequate level of dispatchable generation and improve sufficient system inertia
When contacted, Additional Secretary (Development and Procurement), Ministry of Energy, T. Prassanth, to find out how much RMA Energy were paid to this project, the former said that she doesn’t know as this workshop was started few months ago.
This is not a loan, but a grant from the World Bank. So, we do not know how much this consultancy firm was paid as their fee is paid straight to that company but not through the government or the Ministry,” she said.
When met Chairman Dr. Thilak Siyambalapitiya in his office to find out how much the electricity consumers have to pay for the whims of the thermal and coal interested CEB Engineers though he and his company-RMA Energy when providing consultancy services when drafting the REDMAP and for the ongoing offshore wind power feasibility assessment project, the proposal to add more RE to the grid by 2030, he said that after the country faced an adverse economic situation, the power demand came down rapidly but the RE addition increased.
‘I explained you in detail how a power system is planned and operated to ensure stability and economic operation and how the share of renewable energy in the grid has grown from a minimum of 29% in 2012 to 55% in 2024. This growth did not happen by accident, but through efforts of all: governments, SLSEA, CEB, LECO and RE investors.
‘Long-term generation expansion plan of CEB 2023, approved by PUCSL was based on the demand forecast which says ‘demand has to be 18,725 GWh in 2025’. However, we will cross 16,000 GWh this year. Peak forecast will be 3283 MW; but we will not even cross 2800 MW this year. The conclusion is that the demand is not growing as expected. For 2024, PUCSL approved 160 MW of rooftop solar but we have facilitated 650 MW of new solar, this mean the supply is growing but customer demand is not growing. By January 2024, there should have been 20 MW and by January 2025, 100 MW of battery storage. None of them are available. They should have been procured to purchase these batteries in 2023 and 2024 respectively but procurement process was started only recently. The previous management was grappling with the economic crisis, I do not blame anyone for that delay.
Surplus of generation
‘So, until the demand grows plus storage is established, especially on holidays, all types of power plants have to be cut back. Electricity thus has to be produced at the same time the customer wants it. When there is a surplus of generation, we first cut off all our oil burning power plants, which are very expensive which is more than Rs 35 per unit. Hydropower generation is then curtailed but it is limited by drinking water and irrigation requirements downstream, determined by the Water Board and Mahaweli Authority. Then we curtail CEB’s own renewable energy power plants- Mannar wind power 100 MW and the smaller hydropower plants at Nilambe, Uda Walawe and Inginiyagala. Then if the supply is still in excess, we curtail the coal power plant which purchase price is Rs 19 per unit in order to absorb solar power (price ranges from Rs 15.50 to 42, depending on which year, and which type of contract you signed).
If you log on to CEB website you can see how CEB power plants of all sorts are curtailed on any day, to absorb renewable energy.
‘Like any other similar power plants worldwide, the coal power plant has a special feature. It cannot be cut back to very low levels of production as it has to be switched off completely. If switched off during daytime there will be a delay and an additional cost to restart because it is required to meet the customer demand in the night. Yet in the run-up to the New Year holidays, CEB switched off one coal generator completely, and cut back the other 2 to the minimum during daytime to maximise absorbing solar power and then ramped up at nightfall.
‘Renewable energy is curtailed only as a last resort. The very low demand during New Year holidays was anticipated. It became acute this year, owing to large solar capacity installed in 2024, against a demand that is not growing. So 2025 holidays were different to 2024, more supply, stagnant demand. Hence the cautious cut backs of solar PV larger than 100 kW, on commercial and industrial roofs, and cut back of others only as required’.
When it was said that there are allegations against him for the attempt to curtail, RE, though his own company RMA Energy provided consultancy service to draft the REDMAP that stated the importance in adding RE to the grid and proposed how much RE should add to the system from 2023 to 2026, Dr. Siyambalapitiya said that the consultancy service was provided to the ADB somewhere in 2022 but not to the government of Sri Lanka or to the CEB.
Yes we proposed what the RE capacity that should be added, and how it is to be added and where, well into the future,” he said.
When he was told that CEB Engineers are alleging that he is behind the planned curtailment as he has an interest in coal generation, Dr. Siyambalapitiya queried what evidence this newspaper has that he has interest in coal generation, and what kind of interest is alleged.
‘I am a 65-year old power system planner by profession, since 1982. My overall objective is to work whenever, wherever I am, to ensure Sri Lanka gets electricity at the lowest economic cost, within the government policy framework, whichever the government is in power. So depending on the world trends, I campaign for Sri Lanka to build/not to build different types of power plants for/against government policy and objectives of least cost.
CEB’s decision to purchase diesel and coal at a higher cost has raised eyebrows amongst its own engineers
As you would see, different types of electricity generation has many features: stability, cost, intermittency, renewable, fossil.It is a balancing act; not an argument of this against that, but all types of power plants, big, small, fossil, renewable working together to serve a reliable power supply at lowest cost, aligning with government policy.”
When asked whether he and his wife have divested of their interest in RMA Energy and have resigned from all operations of this company and have no hand in any management and technical control of RMA after accepting the Chairmanship of the CEB which is conflict of interest, and also whether the company has refused offshore wind power pre-feasibility assessment or any other ongoing project in the country’s power sector since he took over CEB office, Dr. Siyambalapitiya said that he resigned as the Managing Director RMA Energy when he took over office at CEB in September 2024.
A new MD has taken over RMA Energy. The company provides consultancy services to banks, developers, governments worldwide. My wife or I have not divested shares in the company. I have no hand in any operations of the company. The company, in any case, is not a service provider to CEB or the Government or Sri Lanka. Offshore wind power pre-feasibility study was conducted for the World Bank in 2023-2024 which was concluded in 2024. I was the team leader of the Sri Lanka study team. The study was won through a competitive bid in 2023.
After I left the Company, the team leader position was also transferred to the new MD. Certainly there was a concluding seminar on the Off Shore windpower study a few weeks ago, to present the findings. The World Bank requested the Ministry of Energy to decide and invite participants to attend a seminar, in which, who did the study, was disclosed, as it is the policy of the government and the World Bank. The study was concluded well before I joined CEB in 2024.
Finally, I agreed to be CEB Chairman for a limited period and that period has now ended. As soon as the government finds a replacement, I will be leaving office,” he said.
A protest promoting LGBTQ rights near the Nallur Kandaswamy Temple in Jaffna has drawn strong criticism from Geethanath Cassilingam, Chief Organizer of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) for the Jaffna District, who said the act goes against Tamil culture and religious values.
In a statement, he stressed that while individuals may seek rights, they must also respect the traditions and beliefs of the Tamil community, especially in sacred spaces.
Cassilingam said, What a shocking shame to see a group of people promoting gay rights and forcing their so called beliefs in front of the sacred Nallur Kandaswamy temple in Jaffna, a sacred place for not only people of Jaffna but the whole country and worldwide devotees.”
He said the protest was against Tamil culture and added it was shocking to see them mocking this culture by promoting their beliefs in front of the most sacred place in Jaffna.
Furthermore, Cassilingam claimed that these groups have hidden agendas and are funded by secret groups who want to enforce their western beliefs on our children.
Meanwhile, he referred to another incident near the temple where many activists and individuals firmly voiced their opinion against a cafe selling meat within the Nallur Temple area and collectively changed the cafe to change their menu to vegetarian in respect of the sacred premises.
However these groups are now quiet when the Tamil culture is being mocked by these groups who are enforcing their so called rights in sacred places,” he stated.
This so called western culture must stay away from religious and holy sites and they must respect the cultures of communities as they ask for rights for themselves,” he added.
Colombo, June 10 (Daily Mirror) – President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has condemned widespread corruption within crucial state departments, revealing that some officials entrusted with upholding the law are themselves engaging in criminal activity.
Speaking at a Poson Poya commemoration event in Mihintale, President Dissanayake addressed the ongoing controversy surrounding a recent Presidential pardon, using the occasion to highlight deep-rooted misconduct within the public service.
Not all, but certain officials in key departments have been found participating in corrupt and illegal practices,” the President said, pointing to alarming examples across multiple institutions.
He accused the Prisons Department of unlawfully releasing inmates, and claimed that some police officers have turned into protectors of criminals rather than working to suppress crime. He also alleged that officials in the Immigration Department are issuing forged passports to underworld figures, while the Department of Motor Traffic is involved in corrupt dealings concerning vehicle registrations.
This is the state of the country,” the President declared, adding that the nation’s social structure is under threat from such systemic failures.
However, he noted that recent law enforcement efforts have led to the arrests of several officials from the Immigration, Department of Motor Traffic, Prisons, and Police services on corruption charges.
Over the past decade, global corporations have positioned themselves as champions of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), aligning publicly with the LGBTQIA+ community through sponsorship of Pride Parades, rainbow branding, and internal inclusive” workplaces. These initiatives were widely heralded as progressive milestones, signaling a new era of social responsibility. The LGBTQIA community thought the corporates had their interests at heart. That could be further from the truth. In reality, corporations viewed the LGBTQIA community as a niche market to exploit for profit. As economic returns faltered, corporate enthusiasm for LGBGTQIA is fast on the decline.
Increasingly, major corporations are quietly retreating from Pride sponsorships, scaling back DEI efforts, and removing rainbow branding. This shift is not accidental—it reflects a stark economic reality: corporate investments in Pride and DEI are failing to generate the profits they expected. If they thought they would win customers – they have discovered they have lost more than they have won.
What once seemed like a winning strategy is now seen by many business leaders as a liability. The profit-driven corporate embrace of inclusivity” is collapsing, revealing that much of the movement was a performative and ideological ploy rather than genuine support or concern for LGBTQIA demanded lifestyle.
Customers Who’ve Stopped Shopping Due to LGBTQIA+ Promotion
Bud Light (Anheuser‑Busch): Sales dropped nearly30%, nationwide massive boycott after partnering withtrans influencer Dylan Mulvaney. Bud Light lost USD26billion.
Target: Target lost shoppers due to Pride merchandise and inclusive bathroom policies – Surveys showed a drop from 42% to 38% in customer loyalty—Target removed Pride-themed merchandise from many stores
Walmart: In 2024 terminated DEI programs, ended racial equity training, ceased evaluating LGBTQIA & decided not to renew its 5 year $100m commitment.
Companies Dropping Pride Parade Sponsorships (by Country)
United States: San Francisco Pride:
Comcast
Anheuser-Busch
Diageo
La Crema
Together, these departures resulted in around USD300,000 in lost funding
Other US cities: Comcast, Coca‑Cola, PepsiCo, Citi, Amazon (Audible), Target, and Nissan pulled support, causing USD200,000–750,000 shortfalls
New Zealand: Auckland Pride:
NZME
Vodafone
BNZ
ANZ All pulled sponsorship over a dispute concerning police uniforms
United Kingdom: Birmingham Pride:
City council withdrew £15,000+ funding amid budget cuts
Canada: Toronto Pride:
Criticism over corporate float” dominance; small and racialized community groups priced out or marginalized
Companies Removing LGBTQIA+ Rainbow Colors or Branding
Hansen (Denmark): Removed rainbow logo and LGBTQIA+ content from U.S. communications after safety threats and boycott threats
Nike: For the first time since 1999,did not launch a Pride collection in 2024, shifting instead to internal community programs
Target: Scaled back Pride displays, limited in-store merchandise, and discontinued a decade-long partnership with GLSEN
Google/Alphabet: Displayed inconsistent rainbow branding—applied it in Western markets but withheld it in others—highlighting selective usage.
What this shows us is:
Corporate backing was conditional—valuable only while it served profit or image goals.
Consumers exert power—backlashes (like those against Bud Light and Target) had real financial impact.
Event organizers are bearing the cost—Pride parades face sizeable funding gaps.
DEI branding lacks consistency—companies employ rainbow logos selectively, often withdrawing when politically risky.
The Profit Motive behind Corporate Support
LGBTQIA movement was a corporate profit initiative from the outset & nothing else.
Companies anticipated that:
Creating a new customer base:creating a younger generation of consumers purchasing pro-LGBTQIA merchandise.
Increased brand loyalty:Belief that diversity” would boost sales.
Attracting global talent:Belief that inclusivity” would improve employee recruitment. Merit has regained due place.
Market differentiation:Belief that use of Rainbow branding and participation in Pride parades would provide brand presence in public.
Expectations led to substantial investments for sponsorship, LGBTQIA events, hiring promoters, etc – the calculated revenue corporates expected their investment to translate to did not occur.
Example 1: Levi Strauss – Jennifer Sey former Brand President:
It’s a strategy to make money. … When those campaigns stop doing that, they’re going to stop doing it.”
Sey states corporate Pride branding was entirely profit-motivated — and that support evaporates once it stops being financially advantageous.
Example 2: Out Leadership CEO / Merrill Lynch
And we brought in twobillion dollars of LGBTQ assets…
We got Merrill Lynch to support LGBT rights because I tied it directly to business.”
This confirms that corporations often make calculated decisions, directly linking LGBTQIA+ initiatives to asset and revenue goals.
Example 3: Target CEO’s Investor Acknowledgement
Target CEO Brian Cornellpublicly admitted during investor calls that:
Sales fell nearly6% after launching Pride merchandise, partially due to a negative guest reaction.”
Theyscaled back Pride products to protect team safety and appease customers.
This shows astrategic policy reversal, based entirely on profit and public reaction — not on principle.
Example 4: Starbucks Internal Memo
A Starbucks memo instructed stores toremove Pride decorations, citing political caution:
Rather than demonstrating inclusivity… our store will disavow decorations entirely.”
Pride organizations in 2025 reported budget shortfalls of $200,000–$750,000 because top sponsors like Anheuser-Busch, MasterCard, Comcast, and Target withdrew their funding.
The clear rationale: avoid political and consumer backlash to protect profits, even at the expense of previous support.
Example 5: Pullbacks in Streaming Platforms
Axios notes thatNetflix, HBO Max, Apple TV+, and others significantly reduced Pride Month promotions, while Hulu and Peacock did not — signaling a selective, economically driven pullback.
Public Perception: Profit vs. Principle
AJune 2025 Pew poll found:
68%of LGBTQ+ adults believe corporate Pride support is profit-driven.
Only16% view it as genuine. – hype failed, consumers are fed up
A 2024 Axios/YouGov poll found that 68% of LGBTQ+ adults believed corporate Pride support was primarily profit-driven, and only 16% believed it was sincere. Consumers, even within the community, began disengaging
Consumer skepticism reveals that corporate allyship is mainly transactional.
The corporate push into LGBTQIA+ branding, DEI programs, and Pride sponsorships began in earnest around 2012–2015, peaked between 2018–2022, and began collapsing in 2023–2025.
Estimated Corporate Investment Duration: 8 to 10 Years
Year
Key Events & Milestones
2012–2015
Early adopters (Apple, Google, Levi’s, Nike, Starbucks) began visibly supporting Pride.
2016–2018
DEI departments expanded rapidly; brands like Target, Disney, Netflix doubled down.
2019
50th anniversary of Stonewall – corporate participation hit record highs.
2020–2022
Post-George Floyd era triggered aggressive DEI funding and woke marketing.
2023
Bud Light backlash marks the beginning of serious public revolt.
2024–2025
Major pullbacks: Target, Anheuser-Busch, Nike, Walmart, and Pride event sponsors exit.
Summary
Most brandsinvested for 8–10 years in LGBTQIA+/DEI efforts.
Why they stopped: public backlash, falling profits, and growing political risk.
The Reality Check: No Profit, rising costs
The corporate assumption that DEI and Pride sponsorships would boost long-term profitability has not materialized in practice. Firms are now experiencing the opposite effect—growing costs, declining returns, and reputational backlash. Resulting in CEOs & brand managers quietly retreating to avoid controversy.
The DEI Bubble Is Deflating – Departments quietly dissolving
Corporations are laying off DEI staff and cutting budgets for inclusivity” programs. DEI departments are often first to be downsized in cost-cutting cycles.
The freeze in USAID funding has significantly affected LGBTQIA+ programs globally, driven primarily by the January 2025 executive order from President Trump to pause foreign aid, explicitly excluding DEI and gender-identity initiatives including transgender surgeries.
Google, Meta, and Amazonhave all laid off DEI staff since 2023.
Netflix’s DEI teamwas reduced during budget restructuring.
Smaller companiesand franchises have either merged DEI with HR or eliminated it altogether.
This retraction speaks volumes: if the initiatives had been driving real profit or productivity, they would have been protected. Instead, it’s clear they were maintained for optics, not outcomes.
Globally too the pinch was being felt among LGBTQIA+ Communities
South Asia (India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan)
Nearly all USAID-funded LGBTI projects—including health, legal aid, and entrepreneurship initiatives—were suspended
Hyderabad’s Mitr Clinic, Andhra Pradesh’s first trans healthcare center, shut down after serving 150–200 clients monthly
Philippines
Organizations like LoveYourself lost critical support for HIV testing and LGBTQIA+
Uganda
Africa Queer Network, funded largely by USAID, had to cease operations, with staff sent home and services discontinued
Global Advocacy Organizations
Outright International paused programs in 32+ countries; the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute lost ~$600,000—two-thirds of its yearly budget
Corporate Blowback: The Backlash that Broke the Illusion
The LGBTQIA+–corporate alliance is fast collapsing following a wave of consumer backlash, brand boycotts & public criticism. Many corporations now find themselves scrambling to contain the fallout from what has become an ideological liability.
Disney, once a DEI poster child, faced subscription declines and investor criticism over LGBTQIA+ content in children’s programming. The backlash grew so intense that the company quietly walked back several projects and reshuffled its leadership.
These events sent an unmistakable message: the assumed customer base was not as aligned as anticipated. The promise of increased loyalty, goodwill, and revenue failed to materialize. Instead, these companies watched their reputation fracture across political lines.
Rainbow Branding becomes a risk
Rainbow logos and merchandisinghave started disappearing.
Starbucks,Levi’s, and Walmart either scaled back or completely withdrew Pride-themed decor and advertising.
Streaming giants such asNetflix and HBO Max significantly toned-down Pride promotions in 2025.
Rainbow branding is now perceived by large swaths of consumers asideological activism, leading to boycotts, security risks for employees, and damage to long-standing brand trust.
Corporate support for LGBTQIA+ causes was never unconditional. It was a calculated business strategy — one that presumed mass consumer alignment and overlooked cultural complexity. When financial returns didn’t meet expectations, and when backlash threatened market share, these companies retreated.
What began as a show of solidarity with LGBTQIA community now appears, to be a short-term marketing ploy, leaving a wake of disillusioned youth, fractured trust, and an entire movement wondering what happened.
The Medical Fallout: Rise in Youth Transitions, Lifelong treatments & health crises
Surging Youth Transitions fueled by Corporate-Backed Narratives
The normalization of gender identity fluidity — promoted aggressively through corporate campaigns, DEI trainings, and media — has led to a dramatic increase in the number of children and adolescents identifying as transgender or non-binary.
According to recent data:
In the U.S., the number of youth (ages 13–17) identifying as transgendermore than doubled between 2017 and 2023 (Williams Institute, UCLA).
The UK’sTavistock Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) saw a 4000% increase in referrals over a decade, particularly among girls identifying as trans boys.
In Canada and parts of Europe, similar exponential growth has been reported, with clinicians concerned over a surge in teen-onset gender dysphoria.
These numbers don’t reflect a natural organic trend but a socially and ideologically driven surge — enabled by corporate messaging and health care systems incentivized to provide pharmaceutical and surgical solutions.
The Business of Transition: A multi-billion-dollar Industry
Pharmaceutical giants profit immensely from the gender transition process, which often requires lifelong dependence on medical treatments:
Hormones & Puberty Blockers
Lupron (Leuprolide)– originally used for prostate cancer – is now widely prescribed to children to pause puberty.” It can cost $10,000+ per year and must be administered for years.
Estrogen and Testosterone therapies– used for gender affirmation – are often lifetime medications, generating stable revenue for companies like AbbVie, Pfizer, and Eli Lilly.
Industry analysts estimate theglobal gender reassignment market will reach $1.95 billion by 2030, driven primarily by hormonal drugs and surgeries.
Surgeries
Top surgeries (double mastectomy for transmasculine youth): $9,000–$15,000 per patient.
Bottom surgeries: $25,000–$100,000+ depending on procedures, with long-term complications requiring follow-up treatments.
In the U.S., some states now cover these under Medicaid or insurance — meaning the pharmaceutical and medical industries are reimbursed by taxpayers. (the call to make LGBTQIA legal is to enable these operations via taxpayer funding)
Psychological Risks and Irreversible Outcomes
A 2021 study in theJournal of Sex & Marital Therapy found no conclusive evidence that hormone therapy reduces long-term suicide risk or improves mental health, contradicting the justification often cited for early interventions.
60–70%of youth with gender dysphoria resolve their identity without intervention if left alone through puberty — yet these children are being fast-tracked into permanent changes.
Detransitioners, a growing group, are beginning to speak out against how corporate and activist narratives pushed them into irreversible decisions, often as minors.
HIV/AIDS and Pharmaceutical Dependency
While corporations paraded Pride flags, the actual health metrics within parts of the LGBTQIA+ community worsened:
In the U.S.,70% of new HIV diagnoses in 2022 were among gay and bisexual men, according to the CDC.
PrEP medications (like Truvada and Descovy)— developed by Gilead Sciences — are now being marketed to youth and transgender individuals as part of inclusive healthcare.”
The HIV treatment and prevention drug market is projected to surpass$37 billion by 2030, with most profits coming from daily, lifelong regimens.
LGBTQIA+ community claimed this addiction as empowerment,” but it was nothing other than medical dependency that benefits pharmaceutical giants far more than patients.
LGBTQIA+ Community was Marketed — Not Empowered
Corporate LGBTQIA+ activism had less to do with empowerment and more to do with market creationfor profit:
Children were turned intolifelong medical customers.
Major corporations profited from the illusion of allyship,” while the community became increasingly medicalized, divided, and now abandoned as profits decline.
As former GSK executive Martin Roussel admitted in a 2023 industry forum:
The LGBTQIA+ market was a strategic opportunity — a culturally activated, politically protected group with clear pharmaceutical dependencies. It was a perfect storm for long-term ROI.”
Who Really Benefited?
Pride flags are reducing. Rainbow packaging is disappearing. DEI departments are being dismantled. Yet, the medical interventions, identity confusion, and health burdens remain — particularly among the youngest and most vulnerable.
The LGBTQIA+ community — and especially transitioning youth — were used.
As corporations retreat from LGBTQIA+ branding and DEI initiatives under mounting public and financial pressure, questions must now be asked of the UN and its agencies — the very institutions that lobbied governments worldwide to legalize and normalize these ideologies under the banner of human rights. For years, bodies like the UNHRC, OHCHR, and UNDP aggressively partnered with corporations to promote sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) legislation, often overriding cultural, religious, and democratic resistance in Global South nations. Now that the private sector is quietly withdrawing due to brand damage, consumer backlash, and a lack of commercial return, these agencies remain unapologetically entrenched, offering no introspection or accountability.
Nowhere is this more evident than in CEDAW — a treaty created to eliminate discrimination against women, but which has since morphed into a platform for ideological overreach.
Through General Recommendations,” the CEDAW Committee has demanded decriminalization of homosexuality, legal recognition of transgender identities, and education reforms promoting gender theory — all under a treaty that never mentioned gender identity” or sexual orientation” to begin with. Feminist groups globally have begun to reject this shift, warning that CEDAW is now undermining the very women and girls it was created to protect, by erasing biological sex in favor of gender identity and silencing legitimate child protection concerns.
These unelected bodies — unlike the corporations now fleeing — are not accountable to markets or electorates. Their continued pressure on sovereign states, without local consent or benefit, reveals an ideological agenda divorced from lived realities. When both profit and people push back, and when even corporate allies abandon ship, who exactly are these UN agencies still speaking for? And why are their agendas immune to the same scrutiny applied to the private sector?
It is a warning for Sri Lankan Parents.
What this means for Sri Lanka
1. Wake-Up Call against Blind Imitation
Sri Lanka and similar nations have often felt pressured to mimic Western liberal trends — from legalizing same-sex relationships to embedding DEI policies in public and corporate life. But now, as Western nations and their corporations are reversing course, it becomes evident that these trends were not based on deep, lasting values — they were ideologically fashionable and profit-driven fads.
Lesson: Following Western trends without cultural, social, or economic alignment can lead to policy disasters that harm a society more than help it.
2. Proof that ‘Inclusivity’ was a Manufactured Trend
The sudden retreat of corporate giants — after pushing DEI and LGBTQIA+ branding for a decade — proves that much of this was strategic PR, not moral commitment. It was manufactured to:
Capture youth markets,
Exploit identity trends, and
Earn social capital cheaply.
Lesson: Legislating based on Western ideological hype — rather than national values, local data, or cultural context — exposes nations to foreign social experiments with no accountability when those experiments fail.
3. Policy Reversals in the West = Time to Reassess at Home
If the very nations that promoted LGBTQIA+ rights, gender identity policies, and DEI mandates are now:
Defunding programs,
Firing DEI departments,
Reversing school curricula, and
Backing out of pride campaigns, then why should Sri Lanka or any other countryblindly legalize or endorse what is clearly no longer seen as valuable even by its creators?
Nations like Sri Lanka must stop legislating based on temporary Western approval. What is trending today in Washington or London may be abandoned tomorrow — but the damage to Sri Lanka could be permanent.
In 2023, a deceptively packaged proposal was tabled to amend Section 365 and fully repeal Section 365A of Sri Lanka’s Penal Code — laws that currently criminalize unnatural sexual acts and gross indecency. LGBTQIA+ lobbyists and their foreign-funded backers claimed these were colonial relics” and tools of discrimination.” This is an outright falsehood. A legal Trojan Horse. A weaponized lie to justify their lobbying.
These lobbyists are not pursuing equality — they are hijacking Sri Lanka’s legal system to decriminalize all forms of homosexuality, erase protections for children, and break down religious, cultural, and moral safeguards that have protected society for generations. They are not even bothered about adults sexually abusing children to satisfy their lusts.
What Rewriting Penal Code 365 Really Means:
1. Decriminalize Homosexuality in All Forms
By removing the words man” and woman” from Section 365, the rewritten version proposed in 2023 which the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka is now recommending removes any criminal penalty for any unnatural sexual act — regardless of context, setting, or potential for harm. The lame excuse that this abuse is covered in other acts omits to accepts that only in 365/365A does the crime specifically cover same-sex sexual abuse. In other provisions, the lawyers would need to argue the case & everything would boil down to interpretations. The disadvantage would always be with the victim.
What rewriting Penal Code 365 actually means:
Male-male, female-female, and nonbinary sexual acts — allfully legalized.
Anal and oral sex— formerly prosecutable under 365 — now protected by law.
Only bestiality remains penalized. Every other human-to-human act —no matter how unnatural, exploitative, or immoral — becomes fair game.
Bottom line: Does the above remotely cover discrimination or does it advocate lust? This is not about ending discrimination. This is about enshrining any form of homosexual conduct as untouchable in the law — regardless of age, setting, or consequence.
2. Erase Protections for Male Children (particularly under 365A)
Section 365A is one of the few legal shields male children have in Sri Lanka against predators. Rather than repeal this entirely as was the 2023 proposal, this should be amended to include female & 365A should be further strengthened. However, the Human Rights Commission Sri Lanka appears to want to remove this safeguard too.
If 365A is repealed:
Indecent behavior, grooming, and coercive acts toward boys — such as exposing, touching, or verbal abuse — will no longer be punishable unless statutory rape can be proven.
Underage male victimslose legal recourse unless a full sexual assault with penetration occurs — a near-impossible standard in many real-life abuse cases.
Bottom line: This is legal disarmament of the system meant to protect boys from abuse in homes, schools, temples, churches, and tuition centers. It’s open season on male children, and the LGBTQIA+ lobby knows it.
Presenting 365A as a discrimination” the LGBTIQA lobbyists want to completely remove this provision. HRCSL are also happy to oblige. Once again look at the list of prominent names who are also agreeable!
3. Remove Legal Safeguards in Schools, Hostels, and Orphanages
Sections 365 and 365A currently empower authorities to monitor and prosecute sexual misconduct. The repeal will strip away these powers.
What’s at stake:
Hostel wardens, principals, clergy, and matronslose legal grounds to intervene unless rape is proven.
Indecent exposure, molestation, and grooming in orphanages and schools?No longer prosecutable.
Same-sex sexual experimentation or coercion in boarding facilities?Now protected behavior.
Bottom line: Children in institutional care become sitting ducks, while the system looks away — not out of ignorance, but because the law now forbids action. How can HRCSL even recommend such?
4. Open the door to Foreign Ideologies that contradict Sri Lanka’s Cultural & Religious Values
Let us be clear: This is not a domestic legal reform. This is a foreign ideological coup.
These laws are being rewritten under direct pressure from foreign-funded NGOs, Western embassies, UN agencies, and LGBTQIA+ global lobby groups.
Their goal is to:
Introducegender-fluid education in schools (how bizarre to even promote the idea that a person is neither male nor female – those promoting such need immediate mental appraisal)
Legalizesame-sex marriage
Normalizeminors undergoing gender transition (the West is now reversing having experienced the dangers)
Punish cultural dissent as hate speech” – this new term was specifically introduced to silent the sane voices
Bottom line: This isn’t modernization — it’s moral invasion. It’s a hostile cultural takeover — by stealth — disguised as human rights.” It is an attack on the nation’s Buddhist, Hindu, Islamic, and Christian foundations.
Expose the Lobbyists — Call Out the Cowards
Let it be stated without apology:
The lobbyists behind this scheme — both local and foreign — have deceived the Sri Lankan people, misled the President, manipulated the Cabinet, and attempted to outmaneuver the legal system by using human rights” as a mask to push a foreign agenda.
They haveexploited children’s rights rhetoric to promote sexual permissiveness.
They haveshamed the public into silence, using Western media tools.
They haveinfiltrated law faculties, civil society groups, and public discourse to normalize what is not normal.
They have lied. And now they must be named, shamed, and held accountable.
This is not progress.” This is cultural betrayal, and the Sri Lankan people must rise with clarity and courage to reject this ideological blackmail.
This Is Not Reform — It’s Surrender
Repealing or rewriting Penal Code Sections 365 and 365A is:
Not about ending discrimination – Police statistics prove a non-existent discrimination”
Not supported by crime data or judicial necessity
Not requested by the general public
Not aligned with any religious or cultural value in Sri Lanka
Australia is desperate. Driven by US hegemony, Australia is on a mission to get anyone it can get to confront China. For this reason, the Australian Defence Minister was in Sri Lanka. The two countries agreed to strengthen defence cooperation and dialog but fell short of any concrete agreement. Sri Lanka has no regional or global security threats or enemies, therefore, Sri Lanka should not invite trouble and certainly not fight others’ wars. This is a golden opportunity for Sri Lanka to put Australia on the mat on Tamil terrorists. Unlike other US military proxies, Australia is yet to ban Tamil terrorist groups. Banning Tamil terrorist groups must be a precondition for any defence understanding with Australia. No deal is possible without it.
Though it is a large country, Australia has a small military. It will be routed easily in a war with China. Its diverse population is very unlikely to take up arms against a war they cannot win. This has led to desperate attempts by Australia to win neighbors for its impending war with China. Despite calling the Indonesian president a human-rights abusing dictator, Australia has reached out to him a number of times begging him to agree to defence deals. All south Pacific nations and other neighbors have been wooed by repeated diplomatic moves.
Sensing the desperation, these countries have played their cards right. They have demanded massive economic and other benefits in return. These include funding for education, infrastructure, sport, English language education, increased migration quotas, recognition of their languages in Australia’s cultural funding mechanisms, mutual recognition of universities, wheat and other food donations and a number of other sweeteners. Sri Lanka must ask the same. This is the time.
However, despite getting these Sri Lanka should not get involved in regional conflicts. The maximum Sri Lanka should do is provide verbal support, diplomatic support and follow the friend to all, enemy to none” stance. If Australia refuses to ban Tamil terrorist groups as banned terrorist groups, Sri Lanka should flatly refuse any defence agreement or discussion. If USA, UK, the EU and India could ban Tamil terrorist groups, there is no reason why Australia cannot. After all Sri Lanka is not looking for backup to fight a losing war with China.
Dr. Mrs. Mareena Thaha Reffai 23a, auburn side Dehiwala
Dear Mr. President,
There is no doubt that we, the people had great hopes when we brought you into power. Whatever the masses may say, the majority still believe in you and we recognize the fact that you need time to fulfil all your promises and some are harder than you imagined and it is highly appreciated you’re allowing the Ministry of justice take its independent course without political interference.
All well and commendable, but unfortunately you have failed miserably in one aspect, which, the intellectuals, the decent people, the educated masses of this country expected dearly. It is the way the behavior of today’s politicians in the parliament. In spite of boasting of educated majority in the parliament – at least on your side, I must say, watching the happenings of the parliament procedures is – to say the least, painful, worse than a fish market.
I remember being taken to watch the parliament procedures as a student those days when my uncle Mr. A.C.S. Hameed was a parliamentarian. I still remember the awe and respect I felt for the politicians – though, then too, there were heated arguments and vehement opposition but all were expressed with due respect and dignity. No thumping of desks nor shouting matches – certainly no personal insults. We students learnt how to conduct a debate or a negotiation and we felt great respect for our law makers.
But now! The procedures may serve as vulgar entertainment for some but certainly it is repulsive and horrible to watch the so called lawmakers. Even in our class rooms such childish, uncouth behavior will not be tolerated, leave alone in any respectable organization. These uncultured so called leaders often behave like village thugs, shout without prior permission to speak often going beyond his/her given time, while the Speaker shouts himself/herself hoarse. Half of what is said is lost in the roar by the opposition. All in all, it is an unruly, unattractive, ugly circus. Yes, that’s what it is.
Known for discipline, we expected from NPP, decent behavior, as opposed to the past politicians, when you took over. But no, the same attitude, same disrespect for the highest echelon of the country, same thuggery and boorish behavior goes on. Those days it was seen only be visitors, but knowing that not only the whole country, even the entire world is watching, these bunch of LEADERS do not feel ashamed to behave in this unbecoming way.
Its time we put this right. Strict rules must be applied in our parliament and the parliamentarians must be given a training on the etiquette of performing in front of million of viewers; and decorum, decency and dignity must be maintained. No wonder there are no manners, no chivalry and no respect to be seen among our countrymen either, as the Tamil saying goes, How the leaders are, so will be the citizens”.
I sincerely hope as our country marches towards a clean, non corrupt governance, it will also bring in the manners of gentlemen and ladies, the manners of the true exemplary leaders to the country and the people, specially the youngsters will really respecting the elders and will feel like emulating them.
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.”
Startling revelations have come to the fore as to how the present administration of the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) is attempting to promote thermal and coal power by curtailing renewable power generation. 
