Opinion
Duminda affair mishandled: Has the President been led up the garden path?
Some of the prisoners who received a presidential pardon
By Rohana R. Wasala
The cue for writing this piece came from The Island editorial of (Saturday) June 26, 2021 entitled “Presidency should be straitjacketed”, which is about the current controversy over the presidential pardon given to former SLFP MP Duminda Silva, who had been convicted and sentenced to death for his alleged involvement in the murder of four persons in 2011. The Island editorial reflects the prevalent negative take on the Duminda Silva pardon. There is reason for it. He notes, incidentally, with qualified approval, the fact that the US Ambassador has also expressed her displeasure at the presidential pardon granted to the former MP, but in the same breath he asks her whether the US respects the Sri Lankan judiciary, recalling how it tried to save Prabhakaran who had been tried in absentia and sentenced to jail for masterminding the 1996 Central Bank bombing which left 91 innocent people dead and dozens grievously injured, and caused much material damage to the nation. The editorial concludes with the sensible suggestion that “The constitutional provision that enables the Executive President to pardon convicts will continue to be abused, and what needs to be done, we repeat, is to prune it down. Before the ongoing protests peter out, a campaign should be launched to achieve that end.”
(Caveat: The following is a personal opinion of mine apropos the matter in question. I am articulating it as a senior Sri Lankan domiciled abroad who is a layperson where legal problems are discussed; it is offered to the interested readers for what it is worth. Before going on further, I would like to state here that I have the highest respect and regard for the two families caught up in this tragic flow of events. I deeply empathise with them, understand their suffering and share their pain. I am also aware of the similar suffering of the other three bereaved families. Metta to all!)
I, for one, endorse the idea of subjecting the institution of presidential pardon to some kind of accountability guarantor in order to prevent its possible abuse, but with the important reservation that this ‘pruning’ or ‘straitjacketing’ should not undermine the efficacy of the executive pardon as ‘an act of grace’ which the term denotes (thelawdictionary.org). An executive/royal/presidential pardon can be used to provide relief for a convicted person who is subsequently deemed to deserve it: for example, a death raw prisoner like Duminda Silva himself who came to be seen by the public as an unsuspecting victim of a miscarriage of justice in terms of evidence that emerged at least four years after sentencing. The Island editor’s forthright observation that “Ranjan Ramanayake’s telephone recordings that contain his conversations with judges and senior police officers on criminal investigations and court cases, during the yahapalana days, have not only revealed how politicians exert influence on some members of the judiciary and the police but also caused an erosion of public confidence in the judiciary and the police” has been directly prompted by the revelation of a conspiracy that had been plotted to pervert the course of justice against Duminda Silva. The clear case of a breach of natural justice had to be remedied. But the grant of a presidential pardon to him in order to provide a remedy seems to have been effected in an extremely problematic manner.
It is appropriate, before proceeding, to briefly outline the background to the Duminda Silva pardon episode, which is regrettably entangled with the underhand politics of certain adversaries with a religious quirk according to a prominent monk, who are exploiting it to score political gains. Duminda Silva, popular among his supporters as a benefactor of the poor, who hails from a philanthropist business family, was first elected to the Western Provincial Council in July 2004 as a member of the United National Party (UNP). It was in 2005 that the first term of the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA)’s Mahinda Rajapaksa as President started. Duminda Silva defected to the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), the principal partner of the UPFA, in 2007. The UNP charged that he did so in the hope of escaping justice in respect of some criminal cases pending against him, in addition to getting the Asia Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)’s licence restored. (The ABC is today listed under Rayynor Silva Pvt Ltd which runs five radio channels and the Hiru TV. Rayynor is Duminda’s brother.) Duminda was re-elected as a Provincial Councillor in April 2009. Then, in the April 2010 parliamentary election, he was elected as a Colombo district MP under the UPFA.
It appeared that MP Duminda Silva was involved in a fierce personal rivalry with MP Bharatha Laksman Premachandra, a fellow member of the SLFP/UPFA. During the relatively unimportant local government election of 2011, the two of them, while leading their respective groups of supporters during canvassing, came face to face, and apparently, there was a violent clash between them. A shooting took place in which both got injured, Premachandra fatally. Silva suffered serious head injuries. Three others from Premachandra’s group also died. This happened on October 8, 2011. The latter was hospitalised in Singapore. A magistrate’s court issued an arrest warrant on Silva on November 15, 2011.
On September 8, 2016, a High Court Trial-at-Bar found Duminda Silva and four others guilty of murdering four people, including Premachandra. But the decision of the court was not unanimous since Judges Padmini Ranawake and Charith Morais decided on a guilty verdict on five of the suspects, while Judge Shiran Gunaratne acquitted all suspects of all charges.
The High Court decision was appealed against at the Supreme Court. A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the three-judge High Court verdict, and its ruling was announced on October 11, 2018.
What is given above was mostly derived from the Wikipedia. The particular page was last edited on June 28, 2021. However, it should be remembered that the entries about Sri Lanka, as usual, cannot be regarded as free from bias (in favour of the previous markedly pro-west yahapalanaya and against the more independent current administration that replaced it). There is no reference to the Ramanayake tapes (a fact, not a rumour) to countervail the negative comment on Judge Shiran Gunaratne. The Wikipedia should not be blamed for this, because interested fair-minded and knowledgeable citizens can appropriately update these pages if they want to set the record straight in the national interest. Regrettably, there is no foolproof remedy for the relentless misinformation against Sri Lanka spread through the Wikipedia and other international media such as the CNN, Al Jazeera, and the BBC. But this is a different matter, and should be dealt with separately. However, it needs to be explained how the Duminda affair has been mishandled by both the parties concerned (i.e., the two groups of advisors separately representing the pardoner and the pardoned).
On the day of Poson (June 24, 2021) President Gotabaya Rajapaksa pardoned 93 prisoners, including 16 Tamil prisoners convicted of terrorist crimes. This is in accordance with Article 34 (1) of the existing Sri Lankan constitution, which invests the President with the power of granting a pardon “either free or subject to lawful conditions” to any offender convicted of any offence in any court within the Republic. Article 34 (1) runs as follows:
“The President may in the case of any offender convicted of any offence in any court within the Republic of Sri Lanka-
a. grant a pardon, either free or subject to lawful conditions
b. grant any respite, either indefinite for such period as the President may think fit, of the execution of any sentence passed on such offender
c. substitute a less severe form of punishment for any punishment imposed on such offender; or
d. remit the whole or any part of any punishment imposed or of any penalty or forfeiture otherwise due to Republic on account of such offence:
Provided that where any offender shall have been condemned to suffer death by the sentence of any court, the President shall cause a report to be made to him by the Judge who tried the case and forward such report to the Attorney-General with instructions that after the Attorney-General has advised thereupon, the report shall be sent together with the Attorney-General’s advice to the Minister in charge of the subject of Justice, who shall forward the report with his recommendation to the President.”
The gratuitous dragging in of the Poson as a symbol of Buddhist compassion and mental serenity into the graceful act of releasing long suffering prisoners is suspicious because its sincerity was somewhat compromised by the inclusion of the special case of the controversial Duminda pardon. Undoubtedly, it was not meant to reflect positively on the President, whoever contrived it. The release of the Tamil prisoners was hailed as a long overdue positive step towards so-called reconciliation by the agents of certain hegemonic interventionist powers who are pursuing their respective geopolitical agendas at the expense of hapless ordinary Sri Lankans’ human rights, democracy, national security, independence, political stability, and economic wellbeing. Amidst the subdued accolades, not unexpectedly, alarm bells started ringing among Sri Lanka’s critics when, shortly after that, a special presidential pardon was granted to Duminda Silva, ex-SLFP MP who had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death by a three-judge bench in 2016, later confirmed by a five- judge Supreme Court bench in 2018.
The informed legal opinion at present seems to be that Duminda Silva could have easily secured quite lawful exoneration on the basis that he had been denied a fair trial. This would have been better for Duminda Silva because a mere presidential pardon does not absolve him of guilt proven in a court of law ‘beyond reasonable doubt’; now the guilty verdict will remain for life. If he enters Parliament (the path towards which has now been cleared of all impediments by the free pardon), he will be an embarrassment not only to that august body, but to the whole government and the country.
I am not a lawyer, but only a layman using common sense; I am repeating here what well known defence lawyer Tirantha Walaliyadda PC recently explained, which I hope I have understood correctly (Please see below). As far as I know he has a reputation as a senior lawyer who has shown active concern over a long period of time for upholding and preserving the independence of the judiciary and the integrity of the law enforcement authorities and lawyers. He once wrote: “The Judiciary, law enforcement, and the Bar comprise the backbone of the democratic system” (‘Murder of the Judiciary’/Colombo Telegraph/September 1, 2012).
Incontrovertible evidence to prove that Duminda Silva did not get a fair trial came to light relatively recently when MP Ranjan Ramanayake’s privately and arbitrarily recorded secret telephone exchanges, which had taken place before the announcement of the 2016 three-judge High Court Trial-at-Bar decision, between him, High Court Judge Padmini Ranawake, and former CID director SSP Shani Abeysekera, together conspiring to get a guilty verdict, meaning a death sentence, passed on Duminda Silva. (By the way, Shani Abeysekera has been described as a ‘Sherlock Holmes’ by the Sri Lanka bashing press!) These tapes were freely broadcast over the local electronic media, and widely bruited about by the print- and online-based press. For the commonsensical Sri Lankan public, any refusal to grant Duminda Silva a presidential pardon would have been incomprehensible, the possible legal ramifications of such a pardon being generally beyond their ken. Duminda Silva’s popularity among the common people of his constituency was bound to turn his further incarceration into a cause of public outrage. In this connection, the President cannot be accused of having interfered in matters of the judiciary; he has only exercised his presidential prerogative to free a convicted prisoner. He must have thought about the public perception that prevailed that Silva had been subjected to a miscarriage of justice as revealed by the Ramanayake tapes.
As the law now stands (See Article 34.1 quoted above), the President’s pardoning of Duminda Silva cannot be questioned. The executive pardon is a useful institution when applied in the manner and spirit intended. Shouldn’t the presidential pardon prerogative be taken as an effective check on the power of the judiciary (which itself is open to manipulation by corrupt elements among the law enforcement authorities, i.e., investigating police officers and prosecuting and defending lawyers); in other words, the constitutional provision for granting presidential pardons is a legitimate means of bringing about a balance between the judiciary and the executive in the interest of the public weal. Like the other branch of government, namely, the legislature, these two are manned by humans, who are not infallible. An act of grace is a useful way to restore fairness where it seems to have been denied to an accused person due to human fallibility. To preclude the possibility of misapplying the presidential pardon prerogative ( which is nothing if not an act of grace) to help politically important offenders to evade justice (the pardon of convicted rapist Gonawala Sunil by JRJ, that The Island editorial mentions, is a case in point), the fallible human being who wields executive power as president on behalf of the people can be made accountable to them through a simple amendment to the existing constitution according to the aforementioned lawyer Tirantha Walaliyadda PC.
This needs reference to a ‘Colombo Today’ video uploaded to the You Tube (2021-07-02) of a press conference called by Mrs Sumana Premachandra (widow of murdered Bharatha Lakshman) to protest against the grant of a presidential pardon to Duminda Silva, who had murdered her husband and three others “in cold blood” (‘amu amuwe’ as she put it). She declared that she would hold the President responsible for any harm done or threat posed in the future to the lives of herself, her daughter, and any other members of her family as a result of this act of his. She also warned about the likely deleterious national and international consequences of the move. Mrs Premachandra stated that the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) and her daughter former MP Hirunika Premachandra had written to the President about the matter and were awaiting a reply. She thanked the US ambassador and the UNHRC for expressing concern about the pardoning of Duminda Silva. Mrs Premachandra said that she would, however, desist from taking it to Geneva as the ultimate sufferers of the consequences of such a move would be the poor people of Sri Lanka. Then she invited PC Tirantha Walaliyadda to connect via zoom, who, she said, had done a lot to bring Duminda Silva to book when the latter was abroad after the crime. It is apparent that Walaliyadda addressed them from his office.
In his terse remarks, the veteran lawyer stressed three points: (1) By asking for and receiving the pardon, Duminda Silva accepted his guilt over the four murders, thereby condemning himself to a lifelong status of convicted murderer. He thus unnecessarily forfeited the valuable chance he had to successfully appeal for a seven-judge supreme court bench to consider his acquittal on the ground of having been denied a fair trial, which would have been good him personally and saved the President the embarrassment of a presidential pardon that potentially set the outside world laughing (though he didn’t violate the constitution by granting the pardon). (2) The President did not interfere with the judiciary as charged in certain quarters. He just used his lawful presidential power to pardon him, while leaving the guilty verdict that had been passed on the pardoned intact. However, Duminda Silva, though permanently stigmatized for a heinous crime, can become an MP and participate in law making, or even get a ministerial post and perform executive duties! Will the people be ready to accept laws passed by such a parliament? What will happen if this sort of thing goes on without being checked? (3) The matter is grave, but there is a simple solution. Just introduce a minor amendment to the Constitution which would require the president to present to Parliament the day following the grant of a pardon a written explanation setting out the reason/s why it was granted. The document must go to the Hansard. Its effect will be felt at the next election. No parliamentary debate is possible or required, because a presidential pardon cannot be set aside by parliament. This will stop any future abuse of the presidential pardon institution.
PC Walaliyadda expressed dismay that the President who is not a lawyer has not been properly guided by his advisors. My concern is about how the President could stick to a course of action with single-minded doggedness, completely relying on the advice of such advisors.
Opinion
Child food poverty: A prowling menace
by Dr B.J.C.Perera
MBBS(Cey), DCH(Cey), DCH(Eng), MD(Paed), MRCP(UK), FRCP(Edin),
FRCP(Lon), FRCPCH(UK), FSLCPaed, FCCP, Hony FRCPCH(UK), Hony. FCGP(SL)
Specialist Consultant Paediatrician and Honorary Senior Fellow,
Postgraduate Institute of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Joint Editor, Sri Lanka Journal of Child Health
In an age of unprecedented global development, technological advancements, universal connectivity, and improvements in living standards in many areas of the world, it is a very dark irony that child food poverty remains a pressing issue. UNICEF defines child food poverty as children’s inability to access and consume a nutritious and diverse diet in early childhood. Despite the planet Earth’s undisputed capacity to produce enough food to nourish everyone, millions of children still go hungry each day. We desperately need to explore the multifaceted deleterious effects of child food poverty, on physical health, cognitive development, emotional well-being, and societal impacts and then try to formulate a road map to alleviate its deleterious effects.
Every day, right across the world, millions of parents and families are struggling to provide nutritious and diverse foods that young children desperately need to reach their full potential. Growing inequities, conflict, and climate crises, combined with rising food prices, the overabundance of unhealthy foods, harmful food marketing strategies and poor child-feeding practices, are condemning millions of children to child food poverty.
In a communique dated 06th June 2024, UNICEF reports that globally, 1 in 4 children; approximately 181 million under the age of five, live in severe child food poverty, defined as consuming at most, two of eight food groups in early childhood. These children are up to 50 per cent more likely to suffer from life-threatening malnutrition. Child Food Poverty: Nutrition Deprivation in Early Childhood – the third issue of UNICEF’s flagship Child Nutrition Report – highlights that millions of young children are unable to access and consume the nutritious and diverse diets that are essential for their growth and development in early childhood and beyond.
It is highlighted in the report that four out of five children experiencing severe child food poverty are fed only breastmilk or just some other milk and/or a starchy staple, such as maize, rice or wheat. Less than 10 per cent of these children are fed fruits and vegetables and less than 5 per cent are fed nutrient-dense foods such as eggs, fish, poultry, or meat. These are horrendous statistics that should pull at the heartstrings of the discerning populace of this world.
The report also identifies the drivers of child food poverty. Strikingly, though 46 per cent of all cases of severe child food poverty are among poor households where income poverty is likely to be a major driver, 54 per cent live in relatively wealthier households, among whom poor food environments and feeding practices are the main drivers of food poverty in early childhood.
One of the most immediate and visible effects of child food poverty is its detrimental impact on physical health. Malnutrition, which can result from both insufficient calorie intake and lack of essential nutrients, is a prevalent consequence. Chronic undernourishment during formative years leads to stunted growth, weakened immune systems, and increased susceptibility to infections and diseases. Children who do not receive adequate nutrition are more likely to suffer from conditions such as anaemia, rickets, and developmental delays.
Moreover, the lack of proper nutrition can have long-term health consequences. Malnourished children are at a higher risk of developing chronic illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes, and obesity later in life. The paradox of child food poverty is that it can lead to both undernutrition and overnutrition, with children in food-insecure households often consuming calorie-dense but nutrient-poor foods due to economic constraints. This dietary pattern increases the risk of obesity, creating a vicious cycle of poor health outcomes.
The impacts of child food poverty extend beyond physical health, severely affecting cognitive development and educational attainment. Adequate nutrition is crucial for brain development, particularly in the early years of life. Malnutrition can impair cognitive functions such as attention, memory, and problem-solving skills. Studies have consistently shown that malnourished children perform worse academically compared to their well-nourished peers. Inadequate nutrition during early childhood can lead to reduced school readiness and lower IQ scores. These children often struggle to concentrate in school, miss more days due to illness, and have lower overall academic performance. This educational disadvantage perpetuates the cycle of poverty, as lower educational attainment reduces future employment opportunities and earning potential.
The emotional and psychological effects of child food poverty are profound and are often overlooked. Food insecurity creates a constant state of stress and anxiety for both children and their families. The uncertainty of not knowing when or where the next meal will come from can lead to feelings of helplessness and despair. Children in food-insecure households are more likely to experience behavioural problems, including hyperactivity, aggression, and withdrawal. The stigma associated with poverty and hunger can further exacerbate these emotional challenges. Children who experience food poverty may feel shame and embarrassment, leading to social isolation and reduced self-esteem. This psychological toll can have lasting effects, contributing to mental health issues such as depression and anxiety in adolescence and adulthood.
Child food poverty also perpetuates cycles of poverty and inequality. Children who grow up in food-insecure households are more likely to remain in poverty as adults, continuing the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage. This cycle of poverty exacerbates social disparities, contributing to increased crime rates, reduced social cohesion, and greater reliance on social welfare programmes. The repercussions of child food poverty ripple through society, creating economic and social challenges that affect everyone. The healthcare costs associated with treating malnutrition-related illnesses and chronic diseases are substantial. Additionally, the educational deficits linked to child food poverty result in a less skilled workforce, which hampers economic growth and productivity.
Addressing child food poverty requires a multi-faceted approach that tackles both immediate needs and underlying causes. Policy interventions are crucial in ensuring that all children have access to adequate nutrition. This can include expanding social safety nets, such as food assistance programmes and school meal initiatives, as well as targeted manoeuvres to reach more vulnerable families. Ensuring that these programmes are adequately funded and effectively implemented is essential for their success.
In addition to direct food assistance, broader economic and social policies are needed to address the root causes of poverty. This includes efforts to increase household incomes through living wage policies, job training programs, and economic development initiatives. Supporting families with affordable childcare, healthcare, and housing can also alleviate some of the financial pressures that contribute to food insecurity.
Community-based initiatives play a vital role in combating child food poverty. Local food banks, community gardens, and nutrition education programmes can help provide immediate relief and promote long-term food security. Collaborative efforts between government, non-profits, and the private sector are necessary to create sustainable solutions.
Child food poverty is a profound and inescapable issue with far-reaching consequences. Its deleterious effects on physical health, cognitive development, emotional well-being, and societal stability underscore the urgent need for comprehensive action. As we strive for a more equitable and just world, addressing child food poverty must be a priority. By ensuring that all children have access to adequate nutrition, we can lay the foundation for a healthier, more prosperous future for individuals and society as a whole. The fight against child food poverty is not just a moral imperative but an investment in our collective future. Healthy, well-nourished children are more likely to grow into productive, contributing members of society. The benefits of addressing this issue extend beyond individual well-being, enhancing economic stability and social harmony. It is incumbent upon us all to recognize and act upon the understanding that every child deserves the right to adequate nutrition and the opportunity to thrive.
Despite all of these existent challenges, it is very definitely possible to end child food poverty. The world needs targeted interventions to transform food, health, and social protection systems, and also take steps to strengthen data systems to track progress in reducing child food poverty. All these manoeuvres must comprise a concerted effort towards making nutritious and diverse diets accessible and affordable to all. We need to call for child food poverty reduction to be recognized as a metric of success towards achieving global and national nutrition and development goals.
Material from UNICEF reports and AI assistance are acknowledged.
Opinion
Do opinion polls matter?
By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana
The colossal failure of not a single opinion poll predicting accurately the result of the Indian parliamentary election, the greatest exercise in democracy in the world, raises the question whether the importance of opinion polls is vastly exaggerated. During elections two types of opinion polls are conducted; one based on intentions to vote, published during or before the campaign, often being not very accurate as these are subject to many variables but exit polls, done after the voting where a sample tally of how the voters actually voted, are mostly accurate. However, of the 15 exit polls published soon after all the votes were cast in the massive Indian election, 13 vastly overpredicted the number of seats Modi’s BJP led coalition NDA would obtain, some giving a figure as high as 400, the number Modi claimed he is aiming for. The other two polls grossly underestimated predicting a hung parliament. The actual result is that NDA passed the threshold of 272 comfortably, there being no landslide. BJP by itself was not able to cross the threshold, a significant setback for an overconfident Mody! Whether this would result in less excesses on the part of Modi, like Muslim-bashing, remains to be seen. Anyway, the statement issued by BJP that they would be investigating the reasons for failure rather than blaming the process speaks very highly of the maturity of the democratic process in India.
I was intrigued by this failure of opinion polls as this differs dramatically from opinion polls in the UK. I never failed to watch ‘Election night specials’ on BBC; as the Big Ben strikes ‘ten’ (In the UK polls close at 10pm} the anchor comes out with “Exit polls predict that …” and the actual outcome is often almost as predicted. However, many a time opinion polls conducted during the campaign have got the predictions wrong. There are many explanations for this.
An opinion poll is defined as a research survey of public opinion from a particular sample, the origin of which can be traced back to the 1824 US presidential election, when two local newspapers in North Carolina and Delaware predicted the victory of Andrew Jackson but the sample was local. First national survey was done in 1916 by the magazine, Literary Digest, partly for circulation-raising, by mailing millions of postcards and counting the returns. Of course, this was not very scientific though it accurately predicted the election of Woodrow Wilson.
Since then, opinion polls have grown in extent and complexity with scientific methodology improving the outcome of predictions not only in elections but also in market research. As a result, some of these organisations have become big businesses. For instance, YouGov, an internet-based organisation co-founded by the Iraqi-born British politician Nadim Zahawi, based in London had a revenue of 258 million GBP in 2023.
In Sri Lanka, opinion polls seem to be conducted by only one organisation which, by itself, is a disadvantage, as pooled data from surveys conducted by many are more likely to reflect the true situation. Irrespective of the degree of accuracy, politicians seem to be dependent on the available data which lend explanations to the behaviour of some.
The Institute for Health Policy’s (IHP) Sri Lanka Opinion Tracker Survey has been tracking the voting intentions for the likely candidates for the Presidential election. At one stage the NPP/JVP leader AKD was getting a figure over 50%. This together with some degree of international acceptance made the JVP behave as if they are already in power, leading to some incidents where their true colour was showing.
The comments made by a prominent member of the JVP who claimed that the JVP killed only the riff-raff, raised many questions, in addition to being a total insult to many innocents killed by them including my uncle. Do they have the authority to do so? Do extra-judicial killings continue to be JVP policy? Do they consider anyone who disagrees with them riff-raff? Will they kill them simply because they do not comply like one of my admired teachers, Dr Gladys Jayawardena who was considered riff-raff because she, as the Chairman of the State Pharmaceutical Corporation, arranged to buy drugs cheaper from India? Is it not the height of hypocrisy that AKD is now boasting of his ties to India?
Another big-wig comes with the grand idea of devolving law and order to village level. As stated very strongly, in the editorial “Pledges and reality” (The Island, 20 May) is this what they intend to do: Have JVP kangaroo-courts!
Perhaps, as a result of these incidents AKD’s ratings has dropped to 39%, according to the IHP survey done in April, and Sajith Premadasa’s ratings have increased gradually to match that. Whilst they are level pegging Ranil is far behind at 13%. Is this the reason why Ranil is getting his acolytes to propagate the idea that the best for the country is to extend his tenure by a referendum? He forced the postponement of Local Governments elections by refusing to release funds but he cannot do so for the presidential election for constitutional reasons. He is now looking for loopholes. Has he considered the distinct possibility that the referendum to extend the life of the presidency and the parliament if lost, would double the expenditure?
Unfortunately, this has been an exercise in futility and it would not be surprising if the next survey shows Ranil’s chances dropping even further! Perhaps, the best option available to Ranil is to retire gracefully, taking credit for steadying the economy and saving the country from an anarchic invasion of the parliament, rather than to leave politics in disgrace by coming third in the presidential election. Unless, of course, he is convinced that opinion polls do not matter and what matters is the ballots in the box!
Opinion
Thoughtfulness or mindfulness?
By Prof. Kirthi Tennakone
ktenna@yahoo.co.uk
Thoughtfulness is the quality of being conscious of issues that arise and considering action while seeking explanations. It facilitates finding solutions to problems and judging experiences.
Almost all human accomplishments are consequences of thoughtfulness.
Can you perform day-to-day work efficiently and effectively without being thoughtful? Obviously, no. Are there any major advancements attained without thought and contemplation? Not a single example!
Science and technology, art, music and literary compositions and religion stand conspicuously as products of thought.
Thought could have sinister motives and the only way to eliminate them is through thought itself. Thought could distinguish right from wrong.
Empathy, love, amusement, and expression of sorrow are reflections of thought.
Thought relieves worries by understanding or taking decisive action.
Despite the universal virtue of thoughtfulness, some advocate an idea termed mindfulness, claiming the benefits of nurturing this quality to shape mental wellbeing. The concept is defined as focusing attention to the present moment without judgment. A way of forgetting the worries and calming the mind – a form of meditation. A definition coined in the West to decouple the concept from religion. The attitude could have a temporary advantage as a method of softening negative feelings such as sorrow and anger. However, no man or woman can afford to be non-judgmental all the time. It is incompatible with indispensable thoughtfulness! What is the advantage of diverting attention to one thing without discernment during a few tens of minute’s meditation? The instructors of mindfulness meditation tell you to focus attention on trivial things. Whereas in thoughtfulness, you concentrate the mind on challenging issues. Sometimes arriving at groundbreaking scientific discoveries, solution of mathematical problems or the creation of masterpieces in engineering, art, or literature.
The concept of meditation and mindfulness originated in ancient India around 1000 BCE. Vedic ascetics believed the practice would lead to supernatural powers enabling disclosure of the truth. Failing to meet the said aspiration, notwithstanding so many stories in scripture, is discernable. Otherwise, the world would have been awakened to advancement by ancient Indians before the Greeks. The latter culture emphasized thoughtfulness!
In India, Buddha was the first to deviate from the Vedic philosophy. His teachers, Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputra, were adherents of meditation. Unconvinced of their approach, Buddha concluded a thoughtful analysis of the actualities of life should be the path to realisation. However, in an environment dominated by Vedic tradition, meditation residually persisted when Buddha’s teachings transformed into a religion.
In the early 1970s, a few in the West picked up meditation and mindfulness. We Easterners, who criticize Western ideas all the time, got exalted after seeing something Eastern accepted in the Western circles. Thereafter, Easterners took up the subject more seriously, in the spirit of its definition in the West.
Today, mindfulness has become a marketable commodity – a thriving business spreading worldwide, fueled largely by advertising. There are practice centres, lessons onsite and online, and apps for purchase. Articles written by gurus of the field appear on the web.
What attracts people to mindfulness programmes? Many assume them being stressed and depressed needs to improve their mental capacity. In most instances, these are minor complaints and for understandable reasons, they do not seek mainstream medical interventions but go for exaggeratedly advertised alternatives. Mainstream medical treatments are based on rigorous science and spell out both the pros and cons of the procedure, avoiding overstatement. Whereas the alternative sector makes unsubstantiated claims about the efficacy and effectiveness of the treatment.
Advocates of mindfulness claim the benefits of their prescriptions have been proven scientifically. There are reports (mostly in open-access journals which charge a fee for publication) indicating that authors have found positive aspects of mindfulness or identified reasons correlating the efficacy of such activities. However, they rarely meet standards normally required for unequivocal acceptance. The gold standard of scientific scrutiny is the statistically significant reproducibility of claims.
If a mindfulness guru claims his prescription of meditation cures hypertension, he must record the blood pressure of participants before and after completion of the activity and show the blood pressure of a large percentage has stably dropped and repeat the experiment with different clients. He must also conduct sessions where he adopts another prescription (a placebo) under the same conditions and compares the results. This is not enough, he must request someone else to conduct sessions following his prescription, to rule out the influence of the personality of the instructor.
The laity unaware of the above rigid requirements, accede to purported claims of mindfulness proponents.
A few years ago, an article published and widely cited stated that the practice of mindfulness increases the gray matter density of the brain. A more recent study found there is no such correlation. Popular expositions on the subject do not refer to the latter report. Most mindfulness research published seems to have been conducted intending to prove the benefits of the practice. The hard science demands doing the opposite as well-experiments carried out intending to disprove the claims. You need to be skeptical until things are firmly established.
Despite many efforts diverted to disprove Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, no contradictions have been found in vain to date, strengthening the validity of the theory. Regarding mindfulness, as it stands, benefits can neither be proved nor disproved, to the gold standard of scientific scrutiny.
Some schools in foreign lands have accommodated mindfulness training programs hoping to develop the mental facility of students and Sri Lanka plans to follow. However, studies also reveal these exercises are ineffective or do more harm than good. Have we investigated this issue before imitation?
Should we force our children to focus attention on one single goal without judgment, even for a moment?
Why not allow young minds to roam wild in their deepest imagination and build castles in the air and encourage them to turn these fantasies into realities by nurturing their thoughtfulness?
Be more thoughtful than mindful?


