Features
What does ‘FULL IMPLEMENTATION of 13A’ mean?
by Neville Ladduwahetty
The consensus at the recently concluded meeting of the Sri Lankan Party Leaders, chaired by the President, was for the “Full Implementation of 13A” (the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka). However, none of the Party Leaders spelt out what precisely was meant by the phrase “Full Implementation of 13A”.
The general opinion is that “Full Implementation of 13A” means the implementation of all the provisions specified in the 13th Amendment (13A). Since all provisions in 13A, except for Land and Police powers, have already been implemented, it must then follow that the “Full implementation of 13A” would be completed with devolving Land and Police powers as provided in the 13th Amendment of the Constitution which was certified on November 14, 1987.
BACKGROUND to 13A
The 13A was not a self-determined arrangement for sharing power between the Centre and the Periphery of Sri Lanka. It was a structural arrangement unilaterally imposed on the Peoples of Sri Lanka by India, following the Indo-Lanka Accord. Furthermore, 13A as an arrangement for Sri Lanka is based and crafted to suit the political, geographical, cultural and structural formation of the State of India, which essentially is a Parliamentary system that functions as a quasi-federal State. Sri Lanka on the other hand, is based on a Unitary Presidential System. Consequently, 13A is totally unsuited for Sri Lanka. Notwithstanding this fact, since the 13A is the only Centre/Periphery arrangement that currently exists, it is in Sri Lanka’s interest to make it work as best as possible, in a suitably modified form, to fit its existing Presidential system of government.
LAND POWERS
The prevailing understanding relating to Land powers was that it was a devolved subject, until the Supreme Court ruled otherwise as per the determination presented below.Extracts of the judgment by a Supreme Court Panel of 3 Judges relating to State Land, are presented below for the benefit of those who are unaware of this judgment. The determination of the Supreme Court was that “State Land shall continue to vest in the Republic”. See details below.
S.C. Appeal No. 21/13
Before: Mohan Pieris, P.C., C.J., Sripavan, J., Wanasundera, P.C., J.
Judgment written by: Sripavan, J.
Relevant extracts of the judgment are:
“It must be noted that the demarcation between the Centre and the Provinces with regard to “State Land” must be clearly identified…. As far as possible, an attempt must be made to reconcile entries in Lists I, II, III of the Constitution and the Court must avoid attributing any conflict between the powers of the Centre and the Provinces”
“On an examination of the Provincial List, it would appear at item 18 as follows: “Land – Land that is to say, rights in or over land, land tenure, transfer and alienation of land, land use, land settlement and land improvement, to the extent set out in Appendix II” (emphasis as in judgment)Appendix II sets out as follows:
Land and Land Settlement
“State Land shall continue to vest in the Republic and may be disposed of in accordance with Article 33 (d) and written law governing this matter…” (Ibid) Thus, it is important to bear in mind that “land” is a Provincial Council subject only to the extent set out in Appendix II. This Appendix imposes the restriction on the land powers given to Provincial Councils. The Constitutional limitations imposed by the legislature show that in the exercise of its legislative powers, no exclusive power is vested in the Provincial Councils with regard to the subject of “land”.
“According to 1.2 (in Appendix II) it is important to note that a Provincial Council can utilize “State Land” only upon it being made available to it by the government. It therefore implies that a Provincial Council cannot appropriate to itself without the Government making “State Land” available to such Council. Such “State Land” can be made available by the Government only in respect of a provincial Council subject. The only power cast upon the Provincial Council is to administer, control and utilize such “State Land” in accordance with the laws passed by Parliament and the statutes made by the Provincial Council.”
“In view of foregoing analysis, and considering the true nature and character of the legislative powers given to Provincial Councils one could safely conclude that “Provincial Councils can only make statutes to administer, control and utilize State Land, if such State Land is made available to the Provincial Council by the Government for a Provincial Council subject.”
POLICE POWERS
Appendix 1 – Law and Order of 13A Paragraph 11 states: “All Police Officers serving in units of the National Division and Provincial Divisions in any Province shall function under the direction and control of the D.I.G. of such Province”.
Paragraph 11: 1 states: “The D.I.G. of the Province shall be responsible to and under the control of the Chief Minister thereof in respect of the maintenance of public order in the Province and the exercise of police powers in the Province as set out in this schedule”.
This means that the D.I.G. of the Province who is responsible for exercising of “Public Order and the exercise of Police powers” within the Province, is “responsible to and under the control of the Chief Minister” who, as the Head of the Board of Ministers is primarily responsible for making “statutes applicable to the Province”, and is therefore, part of the Legislature of the Province. This arrangement is totally unacceptable because it tempts political interference in matters relating to the maintenance of public order. Therefore, this provision should be amended so that Police could maintain public order independently. Since any attempt to derogate the powers of the Chief Minister would be strongly resisted, despite it being noteworthy, such an amendment would require a special majority of 2/3 of the Parliament voting in its favour. Since it is not prudent to venture on such an exercise at this time, it is best not to devolve powers relating to Law and Order.
A further reason not to devolve Police powers is on account of the prevailing security situation in the country. The lawlessness prevailing in the country is tied up with external threats arising from both drug and human trafficking in which not only Sri Lankans but also foreign nationals, are involved. Furthermore, the Indian Security Agencies have repeatedly warned of activities relating to the revival of the LTTE. In the background of such developments, it would be foolhardy to not give the Provincial Police a free hand to act independently, as it involves National Security, in matters relating to Law and Order in the Provinces. Clearly, devolving Police powers to Provinces at this point in time would compromise the National Security situation in the country.
Realizing the need for the Provincial Police to be free to act independently, India for instance, has made sure that the authority over a State police is held by the State’s Home Department led by a chief or principal secretary, who essentially is an Administrative Officer. How the provisions in 13A relating to Police powers came to be so different from that in India, notwithstanding the fact that the Executive power of the Governor and the powers of the Provincial Council are nearly identical to powers in Indian States, is indeed a mystery.
CURRENT STATUS of 13A
The current status of 13A is that all powers constitutionally provided under the 13th Amendment are devolved to the Provinces except for Land and Police powers. Land power is a reserved subject and therefore, cannot be devolved as determined by the Supreme Court cited above. Police power should not be devolved as currently provided in 13A because of the law and order situation in the country at this time. The current situation is therefore that all possible power under 13A has already been devolved, which means 13A is fully implemented.
If that is in fact the case, why are Provincial Councils often described as white elephants and that the return on the cost of maintaining them does not warrant them being retained. If the reason is the lack of devolved power, any revisions would amount to a new Constitutional Amendment that at a minimum would require a 2/3 majority. This is unlikely in view of the prevailing negative attitude about the effectiveness of Provincial Councils. Therefore, the more realistic approach is to seriously investigate the effectiveness of the existing organizational structure and introduce the needed reforms to make the operation of Provincial Councils more effective.
Explaining the current situation, a Report titled “(PROVINCIAL COUNCILS: OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE OF DEVOLUTION (1996, p. 17) states: “The position of the Divisional Secretary is more awkward despite being placed under the direct authority of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Further, the administrative supervision of the Divisional Secretaries has been assigned to the District Secretaries, who have no direct link with the PC (Provincial Council) system. Thus the Divisional Secretary is a government official and is directly responsible for the implementation of central functions. However, the Divisional Secretary is also made responsible for provincial subjects and functions under delegation from the Governor. As a result, the Divisional Secretary has to service the interests of both the government and the PC”.
“There is no doubt that the resulting dual situation affects the performance of Provincial subjects and functions of PCs. Some PCs have attempted to use Pradeshiya Sabhas as an alternative Divisional level structure for the Divisional administration. If such tendencies continue, it is likely that the Divisional Secretariat and the Pradeshiya Sabha would enter into new areas of conflict of interest” (Ibid).
What is evident from the foregoing is the absence of a clear structural arrangement at the Provincial level; a fact that tends to cause the exercise of Devolved Powers to vary from province to province. On the other hand, clear administrative arrangements exist and have always existed at the District and lower levels. Therefore, devolving power to the District and lower levels makes significantly more sense than what currently exists.
Since it is unlikely that the political establishment at any level would resist any attempts to divest power even if is to the benefit of the People, the more realistic option is to reform the existing Center/Periphery relationship from an organizational and management perspective to make devolution work more effectively.
CONCLUSION
The 13th Amendment was certified on November 14, 1987. This means 13A has existed for nearly 34 years in its original form. It did not take long for the People to realize the ineffectiveness of devolving power to the Provinces under structural organizational arrangements formulated for such powers to operate. Even during the colonial period, the Province as the unit of administration was soon abandoned in preference for the smaller unit of the District as a more effective unit of administration.
Despite this background, the political establishment has persistently insisted that the primary unit of devolution should be the Province and they keep on attributing the insufficiency of the scope of the devolved powers as the primary cause for the ineffectiveness of the Provincial Council system. It is indeed tragic that it has not dawned on them that however much power is devolved, if it operates within the framework of a flawed organizational structure, it would continue to be ineffective.
Another issue of serious concern is that no think-tank, research institution or an institution in this country that specializes in management, has been motivated enough to address the cause or causes for the ineffectiveness of the Provincial Council system. In the absence of such knowledge the impulse would be focus on what additional powers to devolve because that is all the political establishment is interested in, not realizing that even additional powers have to operate within a flawed organizational framework that has proved to be dysfunctional.
Therefore, even at this late stage, the call by the Government should be to engage an institution that specializes in management, or any other, to study the existing structural framework under which devolved powers provided under 13A operate, and recommend how the Provincial Council system could be made more effective as a service to the People, because at the end of the day it is the People who are the beneficiaries of a more effective Center/Periphery relationship..
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
