Features
Ven. Buddhaghosa no betrayer
By Geewananda Gunawardana, Ph.D.
The premise that Ven. Buddhaghosa is responsible for the present status of Buddhism in Sri Lanka (Arahath Mahinda’s mission and betrayal by Ven. Buddhagosa, The Island 06/06/23) is yet another myth. It is true that the current practices have deviated from the teachings of the Buddha, but this transformative process has been in progress for thousands of years under the influence of multitude of factors. The simplest argument against the said premise is that similar transformations have occurred in other places that were outside of Ven. Buddhaghosa’s influence. To understand this transformative process, it is necessary to investigate both the origin of Buddhism in India and its subsequent spread and development in each country in its own ways.
The Buddha rediscovered a set of truths referred to as the Dhamma. The Pali stanza that Buddhists use to venerate the Dhamma clearly explains the nature of these truths thusly: ‘The Dhamma taught by the Blessed One is consistent and teach the same truth, self-evident and can be understood in this life itself, and cannot be changed nor can they be altered over time. Buddha’s Dhamma is to be investigated and can only be understood by oneself. Dhamma is for the wise to understand and realize.’
The Pali term dhamma means many things, but here it refers to What the Buddha Taught, the Buddha Word (vachana), or the Teaching. If the Teaching cannot change, as the stanza states, what keeps changing? In addition to the Teaching, Buddha introduced a system to institutionalise or disseminate his Teaching; in the Pali tradition it is called the sasana. Teaching explains the way Buddha related to reality based on empirical evidence. The objective for his followers is to explore the natural laws or the nature of the universe and the humans’ place in it and “see things as they really are”. The sasana or the system he put in place has three components: 1) knowing the principles (pariyatti), 2) experiencing (patipatti) and 3) realising the truth (pativeda). In simpler terms, this is akin to information turning to knowledge and knowledge turning to wisdom. While dhamma does not change, the sasana or the three aspects can change. Buddha himself predicted that the sasana will change and, at some point, will disappear.
To appreciate this natural process, it is important to understand the way an intellectual and ethical movement started by the Buddha transformed itself into a religion over the millennia. There were many religious movements in India during Buddha’s time, but he was respectful and tolerant of other religions (e.g., Upali Sutta). Instead of rejecting some existing religious concepts, Buddha interpreted them in new ways to fit his Teaching. For example, he gave new meanings to Brahminic concepts such as gods, kamma, and rebirth (Marasinghe 1974, Gombrich 1997). As evident from the large number of Brahmins who became followers of Buddha, the new interpretations were found complete acceptance. That does not mean Brahminism disappeared, it thrived in India and there is ample evidence that it existed in pre-Buddhist Sri Lanka as well along with several other religions such as Jainism, Saivism, and local cults such as Yaksas and Nagas (W. Rahula 1956). It appears that in Sri Lankan Buddhism, the Buddhist interpretations of earlier religious concepts were overlooked in favor of the original or pre-Buddhist interpretations as they better suited to a new narrative.
How did this new narrative arise? There was a major turning point in the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka that was fundamental to the transformation of the Teaching, but it has been mostly overlooked by scholars. The devastating events of the 1st century BC – famine, internal revolt, and invasions that nearly wiped out the sasana, compelled the Sri Lankan bhikkhus to commit the Tipitaka into writing. After the country returned to normalcy, the surviving few bhikkhus had raised the question: what should be the purpose of the sangha? Is it to practice (patipatti) or to learn (pariyatti) the Teaching? Having experienced the threat that caused near extinction of the Teaching, the sangha had decided that it was learning that is paramount in perpetuating the Teaching. This decision, it appears, resulted in the segregation of monks into two vocations that had not been described in the Pali Canon before: the village dwellers termed grantha-dhura and the forest dwellers termed vipassana-dhura (W. Rahula 1956).
Initially, the grantha-dhura monks were required to learn and teach the Tripitaka ensuring the perpetuation of the Teaching. At a time when writing was not widespread, the primary goal was to memorize the texts and pass it on to the next generation. Gaining a deeper understanding of the Teaching as required for liberation became less important. This attitude towards preservation persists even today: in many temples, copies of the Tipitaka and other texts are kept under lock and key to be used at an unknown future time, and memorizing Pali stanzas without paying much attention to their meanings is standard practice. Over time, the grantha-dhura monks undertook the teaching of other subjects like languages, grammar, history, logic, medicine, and astrology thereby further deviating from the ideals.
Naturally, the grantha-dhura monks contributed more to the society, and rulers and laity alike favoured them and rewarded them over vipassana-dhura monks. This differential treatment contributed to the dominance of the former and the gradual decline and disappearance of the latter. The unfortunate result of this development is that gaining insight into Teaching was mostly neglected and such practices transmitted from the teacher to pupil over centuries were lost. This environment led to the development of a new culture and a narrative in which the Teaching was presented in a different way.
This new trend is captured by Buddhaghosa in his fifth century commentary on Anguttara Nikaya, Manoratha-purani, where he states that at the end of the first millennium after passing of the Buddha, no disciple will have the capacity to become a stream enterer (sotapanna), the first step of the path to enlightenment (Lopez 2008). The important question is if this was Buddhaghosa’s own invention or was it the norm at the time. As patipatti was given up, expecting pativeda was not a realistic goal. Therefore, it is likely that Buddhaghosa was reporting the prevailing view. Based on examination of life and works of Buddhaghosa the renowned Pali scholar C.A.F. Rhys Davids writes that Buddhaghosa was a meticulous translator who did not inject himself into his work, further supporting this possibility (Law 1923).
A biographer of Buddhaghosa (Law 1923) translates a passage from Mahawamsa describing the reason for sending Buddhaghosa to Sri Lanka by his teacher Ven. Revata: “The text alone (of Pitakattaya) has been preserved in this land (India); the Attakatha are not extant here; nor is there any version to be found the vada (schisms) complete. The Sinhala Atthakatha are genuine. They were composed in the Sinhalese language by the inspired and profoundly wise Mahindo, who had previously consulted discourses of the Buddha, at the three conventions…” Buddhaghosa refers to “Poranas” in his commentaries, but as their Sinhala versions do not exists, scholars are unable to confirm their origins. Again, the question is if these controversial views expressed by Buddhaghosa, particularly those relating to meditation, are his own interpretations or did he merely translate the existing texts? Scholars reason that Buddhaghosa’s Visuddhimagga is a revised from of Vimuttimagga, a treatise by a 1st century Sri Lankan bhikkhu named Upatissa, based on the similarities of the two (Nagai 1917).
As Rhys Davids suggested, it appears that Buddhaghosa did not invent things, he compiled his theses based on existing information.
There is another contributing factor that goes further back in history. The focus of the Theravada tradition is the monastic life. However, Buddha has given equal attention to guiding his lay followers to lead prosperous lives and achieve wisdom and inner peace. However, references to this guidance are few and far between in the Pali Canon. It is possible that the transmitters of the message being monastics themselves, had little or no interest in the affairs of laity (B. Rahula 2008). With the option for liberation in this life removed, and the paucity of guidance to laity, the grantha-dhura bhikkhus were compelled to come up with other ways to keep the laity engaged.
As the vipassana-dhura monks distanced from the society and eventually disappeared over time, a consensus has emerged among both monks and the laity that comprehending the Teaching is not possible in this life and it can be done only when the next Buddha Mettteya (Sanskrit Maitreya) appears. This was most likely inspired by Mahayana tradition. There is evidence that Mahayana influence was present in Sri Lanka as early as the 3rd century. In interviews conducted in late twentieth century, the chief prelates of all chapters have declared that it is not possible to reach the ideals of Teaching in this life in complete contradiction of the verse they recite daily to venerate the Teaching (Bond 1988; Southwold 1983; Gombrich 1988). Metteyya is mentioned in the Pali canon only once. According to Pali scholars, the Chakkavatti-Sihanada sutta (DN 26), in which the reference appears, is likely a later addition. On the other hand, post 5th century Sanskrit literature of the Mahayana school carries frequent references to Maitreya. In late 19th century, when Olcott and Blavatsky were spearheading the revival of Buddhism, they incorporated this concept to their Theosophy (Gombrich 1988).
The new narrative presented was to perform meritorious deeds (punna kamma) and collect merits to ensure rebirth in superior realms and wait for Metteya Buddha’s time to attain nibbana. Most of the meritorious activities prescribed were about supporting the sangha, places of worship, and performing elaborate rituals to venerate the Buddha and sacred objects. This served two purposes: maintaining the sangha and the sacred sites while giving an opportunity for the lay followers to safeguard the afterlife. However, the punna kamma as performed under this premise differs from the practice of dana prescribed in the Eight-fold Path as they are done in expectation of something in return. This also opened the door for pre-Buddhist practices such as offering material things and praying to gods, demons, and other spirits in return of favors or protection from ills to be incorporated into the religious life.
It is worthwhile noting that the dictionary defines religion as the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods. Therefore, the late nineteenth century Western scholars were correct when they coined the term Buddhism to describe the practices they witnessed. By this time, the Teaching, which has an empirical foundation, had been replaced with a belief system involving rituals associated with gods, deities, and sacred objects. The emphasis had shifted to the next life instead of the present life. Cultural rituals and ceremonies have existed during Mahinda’s time, but they were performed for veneration or celebration, but not for salvific purposes as today. As a result, the intellectual and ethical movement that Buddha started had transformed into a religion.
These transformative events keep adding even today. The development of a new ritual known as the Bodhi Puja started around 1976. While the practice of veneration of trees goes back to Buddha’s time, it was not done for salvific purposes. The new Bodhi Puja are perhaps modeled after the Christian services. Bodhi Puja is a very popular practice and is performed to seek help in various situations of life changing from getting through an exam, to getting a job, or to recovering from an illness. This practice is now so widespread that some North American temples conduct Bodhi Puja using potted Bo tree saplings kept indoors.
All is not lost; the Teaching is secure and more accessible to a wider audience than ever. From hindsight, it can be said that the Sri Lankan bhikkhus in the 1st century BC did the right thing. There is only one thing to do to get back on the path: follow the Buddha’s advice to Kalamas. Young generations must be taught not to believe things just because they are in the Pali Canon, or were told by elders, or are in the textbooks prescribed for examinations. They must be taught how to differentiate Teaching from commentaries and literature. Commentators have the liberty to express their views, but, as Buddha advised, we need not take their word without verification.
Scholars, linguists, historians, and archeologists etc., have added new tools to do so. It must be shown that every word in the Pali stanza used to venerate the Teaching is true. It must be emphasized that Teaching is not a belief system and there is no mystery involved; everything is empirical. Science is beginning to catch up with Teaching, and as a result, there are avenues for technology savvy young generations to better relate to the Teaching (Lopez 2008; Wallace ed. 2003; Paul 2016). Teaching offers many tools to benefit life here and now. It is time to stop the blame game and act: encourage the younger generations to be free thinkers and not give into tradition without inquiry. It is the Buddha’s teaching that we should rely on as it provides the skill set needed for leading a prosperous life here and now (B. Rahula 2008).
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
