by Jayantha Dhanapala and Professor Savitri Goonesekere
The Friday Forum makes this statement in a spirit of democratic dialogue on the above issue, which we believe is of concern to all citizens. This programme has been introduced by the Ministry of Higher Education in a military environment under the leadership of the Ministry of Defence.
cartoon courtesy: sundaytimes.lk
According to the letter sent to students they may be offered a place in the national university system and will be expected to produce a certificate of completion which suggests that it is compulsory.
The decision in the Supreme Court dismissing, without stating reasons, all the petitions against the programme, has made it all the more important to have a public discussion on its relevance and impact on the university system. The Friday Forum expresses its deep concern in regard to both the manner in which this programme has been developed and implemented, and the very concept of such leadership training outside the university system.
We wish to emphasise the following:
1. This programme has been imposed on universities and university students by the Minister of Higher of Education in a manner which violates the Universities Act No.16 of 1978 (as amended). Part VII of this Act deals with “The Authorities of a University,” and refers to the Council, the Senate and the Faculties. The Senate is the academic authority, which makes all decisions on academic programmes.
According to Section 20 of the Act the power of the Minister to issue directives to the Universities Grants Commission is extremely limited, referring to finance, university admissions and medium of instruction, and in regard to investigations and responses to crises in administration or the functioning of universities.
2. The Ministry has no legal authority to formulate and implement programmes or courses for university students. Such programmes necessarily come within the purview of the university academic authorities. Under the circumstances development and implementation of such a programme without the approval of these bodies violates accepted procedures of university governance.
3. The UGC is authorised to determine admission but is required to consult universities regarding any teaching courses and programmes. It appears that the UGC too has either been sidelined in presenting this programme or it has failed to fulfil its responsibilities to consult with universities. It is deeply disturbing that a leadership programme for new entrants which has not been considered by the relevant university authorities has been introduced on the basis of a unilateral decision by the Ministry.
4. We certainly do not object to leadership training for students in the national university system. In fact, all students should be exposed to opportunities for personality development throughout their education. However, such programs have to be designed and presented by the universities in keeping with their norms and standards on teaching and learning, and academic freedom. Most universities, following the practice in such institutions of higher education all over the world, already conduct orientation programmes including English programmes for new entrants. The Ministry should be able to resource further upgrading of such programmes.
5. In some countries all youth between certain ages may be required to undergo periods of military training, but we are unaware of any other country where such training is a pre-condition for university admission. Military type training is founded on a system of regimentation. University education is meant to encourage independent learning discussion and argument with tolerance and respect for disagreement and viewpoint difference. In contrast, in the military and allied kinds of training, the emphasis is on command and control, action without disputation, except among the high command.
6. Universities are seats of higher learning where students not only study a curriculum but are also encouraged in critical thinking and a search for knowledge. While the special skills and capacities of the military should be appreciated and military discipline is obviously essential for the purposes of an army, it is not the form of leadership training appropriate for young people who would later play a role as civilians in the country’s development.
The concepts of academic freedom and university autonomy provide the foundation of the teaching and learning environment in universities throughout the Commonwealth. They have not been considered idealistic and antiquated norms that have no relevance to market economies or in meeting the challenges of development or the growth of information technologies. Encouraging military style leadership skills, regimentation and behaviour patterns, is contrary to core values of freedom of thought, opinion and expression, and the value of dissent which all universities should strive to inculcate in their students.
7. These values, and the fundamental rights of students and teachers that are embedded in them, have been recognised in the Supreme Court Determination of 1999 of the Universities Act (Amendment) Bill in a judgement which was delivered by three judges including then Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. It is jurisprudence of this nature in the Supreme Court that confirms the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution which can create an appropriate environment for university education. The dismissal of cases challenging the 18th Amendment, the Local Government Bill and the Pensions Bill, and the recent petitions on the leadership programme must not prevent us as citizens from hoping that the foundation laid in earlier jurisprudence protecting fundamental rights will not be diluted.
8. Officials in the Ministry have made public statements that this military training will help new university entrants to resist the degrading practice of ragging. The ragging culture has in fact spread to and is embedded in many schools and public institutions in this country. In 1998 the late Minister of Higher Education, Richard Pathirana, helped to introduce the Prevention of Ragging Act. Some Universities and Faculties now assist the police to enforce the Act, and they have domestic disciplinary procedures as well as programmes to respond to and prevent ragging. The current ad hoc programme encourages an aggressive response to ragging, rather than focusing on prevention. This may undermine university efforts at preventing and responding to ragging while increasing the risk of violence between student groups.
9. The curriculum of the training programme obtained by the Friday Forum after some effort reveals extremely problematic aspects. No mention is made of the authority responsible for the curriculum but a prominent photograph of the Defence Secretary on the cover of the study guide suggests authorship by the Defence establishment. The predominant focus is on instilling discipline and self-confidence through military regimentation including a five-kilometre walk to be completed in 45 minutes irrespective of individual physical fitness or the widely disparate facilities for sports and physical training in the schools from which the students come.
10. What is more problematic is the content of the module on history and national heritage. The topics are, in order, the arrival of the Aryans, foreign invasions, (who the foreigners are is not clear) and the development of Sinhalese kingdoms. “National heritage” focuses exclusively on prominent cultural symbols of the majority Sinhala community such as Sigiriya, the Temple of the Tooth and the Aukana Buddha statue with none from other communities. Subjecting new university entrants who may well become future leaders of this country to a course which focuses exclusively on the majority community, undermines all the official statements on national reconciliation after three decades of civil strife. If this is an officially sanctioned method of national reconciliation what hopes do we have for a peaceful conflict free future in this country?
11. On the whole the curriculum seems to discourage tolerance for viewpoint difference, and sensitivities for the pluralism and diversity of our country. Regimentation, military discipline and taking pride in a majoritarian version of national heritage and history are what seem to be envisaged as the ideal model of leadership. It is of interest to note that in a group exercise on world leaders the suggested world famous leaders are Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, King Dutugemenu, Anagarika Dharmapala, Mahinda Rajapakse, Veera Puran Appu, and Ranasinghe Premadasa.
We urge the Minister of Higher Education to recognise and respect the autonomous roles of academics and academic authorities in the Higher Educational System under the Universities Act of 1978. We hope that he will refrain from imposing arbitrary decisions on the university system in this manner. We also wish to remind university academics and administrators that it is their duty and responsibility as members of university authorities such as Faculty Boards, Senates and Councils to safeguard and nurture academic autonomy and the integrity of the university system. It is only active engagement and interest on their part that will help to prevent continuous infringements on academic freedom and university autonomy. We need a State university system which up to now has given equitable access to higher education even as universities meet the many challenges faced in achieving high standards of excellence in all universities and disciplines of study.
Unless these negative trends are resisted Sri Lanka may well become the “knowledge hub” of Asia, not through a balanced public private mix, but through exclusive privatisation that will replace decades of a valued public education system.
Jayantha Dhanapala and Professor Savitri Goonesekere
On behalf of Friday Forum, the Group of Concerned Citizens:
Mr. Jayantha Dhanapala, Professor Savitri Goonesekere, Rt. Reverend Duleep de Chickera,
Professor Gananath Obeyesekere, Ms. Manouri Muttetuwegama, Professor Arjuna Aluwihare, Dr. Camena Gunaratne, Ms. Suriya Wickremasinghe, Mr. Ahilan Kadirgamar, Mr. Lanka Nesiah, Mr. J.C. Weliamuna, Dr. A. C. Visvalingam, Dr Stewart Motha
Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, Dr. Deepika Udagama, Ms. Sithie Tiruchelvam,
Ms. Shanthi Dias, Dr. Selvy Thiruchandran, Professor Siri Hettige, Dr. Devanesan Nesiah,
Dr. G Usvatte-aratchi, Ms. Dhamaris Wickramasekera, Mr. Daneshan Casiechetty, Mr. Prashan de Visser, Mr. Chandra Jayaratne
Well done Jayantha Dhanapala, Rt Rev Chickera and your likes. You’ve been silent for far too long. Sagacity no doubt prevented you from rushing in where fools abounded, but a wise and freindly hand was never so amiss as now in our foreign affairs and many other affairs of state.
Despite the cleanest city we have seen in living memory, despite some of the the infrastructural development, despite whatever other good that has been done – there is a certain fineness of things that goes somehow missing today, and those of your ilk cannot remain silent any longer, if you suffer a conscience. Please come forward, stay in the front-line and contribute your mite: Despite the rubble and the rabble, there will still be those who will listen.
As a 24 year old spending at least 7 years in England and being exposed to one of the best education systems in this era , what i feel is the sense of comfort and confidence it has delivered to be to be distinct from many other students and professionals in Sri Lanka. The system me to overcome the boundaries and notional thresholds to climb up the ladder in my professionals career in a span of 1 year and to rise up against the mounting tasks in my profession day in day out.
When the matter was argued before the Supreme Court what i felt was that, there is a a hidden hand behind opposition to this agenda. I am speaking on behalf of the overall student population and for its betterment. Whether or nor the manner in which it was implemented in is dispute what should be pondered is the important message it will deliver to propective university students. Its a bright start to make them competitive and to rise up against the challenges they face themselves.
Mr. Danapala nor Professor Savitri Goonesekere is in their elite positions would ever indertand the need and the problems faced by the university students. So please you the so called intellects refrain from undermining our system in place to make a better sri lanka.
GREAT PROPOSAL , THEN WHY CANT YOUR PEOPLE GO AHEAD?
It is a well written article with very important points highlighted. As a graduate of Sri Lankan University system myself and a lecturer in management , I like to add the following comments too.
1. Leadership training is not only about discipline and maintaining the order but challenging the existing order and recreating a new one within an acceptable intellectual way.After all, all the students go to University need not be trained as corporate leaders. They may become Artists, Scientists and other professional who do not want to have the same leadership style.Therefor military type of leadership solution should not be the only solution.
2. Military legitimacy- In Sri Lanka, it is common for Sri Lankan youths to select the military as a career only if they fail to score enough marks to enter the University ( As we all know, everybody in SL still wants to be an Engineer, Doctor, Manager ect…). So, it is funny to observe that those who failed University entrance may be “training” those who passed. Sometimes they can be even former classmates..
3. Better Leadership Training opportunities- If the ministry is really serious on this, the should organize leadership and orientation training in corporate sector, public sector, INGOs and even local community organizations. This will give the undergrads to select the type of training they need in their own career and also diversity of opportunities.
4. Consultation Process- As the article has correctly mentioned, even the current programs is excellent the way they were implemented was unacceptable . It should be done through consultation of all important parties.
Many of these learned souls are like peas in a pod. We remember very well what people wrote and how they acted at the height of our war with the terrorists. Not a single one of them had valued eradicating terrorism from Sri Lanka at high esteem. It is in that light, we have to read and interpret their write-up.
So, I am not surprised they interpret the laws and bylaws of higher education acts of Sri Lanka and try to become a court unto themselves.
I am not surprised if these geezers hold Obama, the man who ordered to kill Bin Laden at a very high esteem and reject Rajapakse, the man who ordered to kill Piripaharan as a criminal. No doubt, they wanted Obama, to be the role model of our future leaders. May be, this lot wanted our future leaders to admire the way Emperor Constantine spread his religion and not King Dutugamunu. They wanted not Anagarika Dharmapala but Dominican and Franciscan monks to be considered as the saviours of our country. And Browning and Torington as the national heroes and not Puran Appu.
Good that these characters do not disseminate their revelations in Sinhala; else they will be identified as anti-nationals.
Leela
The statement by the Friday forum is well written and certainly expresses the sentiments of the majority on this subject.
Leela, you are at it again, trying shamelessly to defend a regime that has become the very embodiment of Samuel Johnson’s dictum about ‘Patriotism becoming the last resort of scoundrels’.
Can’t you see any sense in what these learned people have highlighted ?
The tailor should do the tailors job, the barber the barbers etc. Military is there to fight wars. Police to maintain the peace. Architects and Town Planners to develop towns and cities. Managers are there to manage and administrate. Every Tom, Dick and Harry have their own talents and specialities. We should not expect everyone to be cast in the same mould. Leaders will become leaders, they do not need any special training. They outshine the others and come to the top ie. except in Sri Lanka where leaders are picked by the Dictator and Fraudsters who get into Parliment.
As far as University Education is considered, it is about using your brains and intellect to discern, analyse and create. Not to do push ups and climb walls. Physical education is a seperate field. Some students are brilliant not because of brawn but becausse of brain. Such ill advised type of training is likely to be nothing but a rag for them.
The people who want discipline should start with themselves. Parliment is one of the the rowdiest places. One venerable priest had his testicles squeezed in parliment and was hospitalised. One hooligan tied a Govt official to a tree. Many have run away with the Mace. The Minister of Highere Education is a jailbird, imprisoned for contempt of court.
AjayH – Let me remind you that regimes are appointed and changed by the people. So far this regime is enjoying popularity in leaps and bounds(Pehaps not to the liking of Western bootlicking Kalu Suddhas). As long as the people backs and protects a regime, its detractors backed by face book revolutions,NGO, and certain power blocks, cannot do anything other than bemoan and critisise.
The concepts of academic freedom and university autonomy provide the foundation of the teaching and learning environment in.. Encouraging military style leadership skills, regimentation and behaviour patterns, is contrary to core values of freedom of thought, opinion and expression, and the value of dissent which all universities should strive to inculcate in their students.. Regimentation, military discipline and taking pride in a majoritarian version of national heritage and history are what seem to be envisaged as the ideal model of leadership…
PERFECT is the word that can be used to describe this excellent article, so true, so painful a reality! Faced a hard time selecting a few phrases of highlight, the entire content so intricately and so realistically bonded together!
Leela and other may hold views on this extremely valuable and timely article. But their sorry state of mental capacity cannot even touch upon the periphery of the knowledge, perception and understanding of the renowned contributors to this article.
The truth is the entire nation and its future is being hijacked by a hysteric maniac regime. An uneducated Education Minister is yelling about a 21st century university student, Asia Wonder, knowledge Hub and all the stupid words invented by a tribalized regime which has no meaning in reality but deceiving gullible public. They say would grant scholarships to foreign students in their knowledge hub universities! Are they mad? Who would send their students to war zone like universities in Sri Lanka which are being regimentalized as a means of perpetuating a crooked and corrupt regime? Do foreign students too would have to undergo this so called leadership training meted out by regimentalized fallouts from education system at grade eight or around or are they exempted from it and only locals who do not raise a voice against this injustice must go through this harrowing?
With the dismissal of the petitions by the court without comment it is evident that the legal system is also apparently and clearly crooked as well. There is no justice in this unfortunate country. It strongly seems to be the case that as the Tamil people here and the diaspora resorted to international jurisdiction procedures to win their rights so must the Sinhalese who are being terrorized and oppressed by the dictatorial regime recourse to international jurisprudence to regain their deprived and alienated rights!
The course contents, in these eminents own jargon, are
* Instill discipline in these raw lads and lasses from remote parts of the land, some of whom have never been away from home.
* Physical endurance training.,
* A refresher course about our history that we have learned even in primary years
* Imparting a bit of self confidence
and last but not least to stand up to the Bullies tell them to nick off.
How can these be contravening the authority of Universities?
Reading through the list of these eminents, one interesting find is that quite a few familiar names that have been against every Govt initiative since the Terrorist appearing here too..
These “concerned citizens” are just trying to interpret couple of “acts” without any real action to address the issue of degrading ragging culture of these institutions. Have the so called autonomous roles of academics and academic authorities so far been able to stop ragging in universities in Sri Lanka? The present government and the minister of education are trying to do something real to eradicate this menace and I suggest these “concerned citizens” to join hands with the government to make this programme a success.
These “concerned citizens” are just trying to interpret couple of “acts” without any real action to address the issue of degrading ragging culture of these institutions. Have the so called autonomous roles of academics and academic authorities so far been able to stop ragging in universities in Sri Lanka? The present government and the minister of education are trying to do something real to eradicate this menace and I suggest these “concerned citizens” to join hands with the government to make this programme a success.
Srilankan intellects missed the bus long time ago, they have started talking only when the guns are turning against them. Unfortunately, bus is is packed with Leelas.
Army at war,is their job.Army at vegetable stalls? Army at fish market? Army at evictions
of city dwellers? Army at foreign missions?
Army between A/L and university? Army at the
neck of the judge? and Army even at funerals?
Are you sure you do not want to be one of those
who are gravely concerned, Leela?
We must be glad that the countries most eminent men and women of learning who comprise this forum have placed before us very valuable food for thought.The present government may be doing many good things for the people but we should not be blind to their mistakes.Whatever the motive militarization and regimentation is not a good sign.Srilankans must safeguard academic freedom to build a strong pluralistic society.Our young people must learn to think critically and to respect other communities that comprise this heterogenous society.A majority driven effort to brainwash youth with a jaundiced version of history and discipline is no similiar to what the JVP did in the seventies and late eighties.Let us hope wiser counsel will prevail
In some countries all youth between certain ages may be required to undergo periods of military training, Einstein was rejected that trainning because he had
flat sole.By this conpulsary leadership trainning Srilanka might loss a paradigm scientist!
An Eelam citizen
In Western societies which Mr Premasiri has a great affection for, and try emulate their virtues , the educated people,mainly the tertiary educated do not insult the lesser educated by calling them uneducated and mental retards.
Also these foreigners are sensntive enough not to denigrate and hurt the feelings of thousands of mentally and physically retarded people and their loved ones who live among them.
Their education have given them more sophisticated eloquence and vocabulary capabilities to present their arguments in a civilized manner.
There are many examples of people in these countries where high school and Uni drop out have excelled in Politics, Industry and even Technology and have left thei marks which would be hard to match by any educated person no matter how many degrees they have obtained,
It is also a fact that ,military training was compulsory in some of these countries at some stage and it has paid a major in their development to the present level,
It is rather pathetic that the self claimed educated people like Mr Premasiri denigrate even the Highest Judiciary in the country because ,they didn’t deliver the verdict him and his mates wanted.
The whole nation of Srilanka today, is enjoying unprecedented freedom and peace that were denied them for three decades.
Ofcourse the ant Govt elements local as well as overseas are going behind the Western powers to bully the Govt to allow their agents to disturb and destroy this frreedom and peaceful environment.
That is the only way they can have any chance of stopping Srilanka becoming a progressive and prosperous united Country.
Absolutely right, Anonymous. I applaud you for recognizing Leela’s traits as being socially unhealthy. LEELA do you hear what others think of you? In case you dont know, you bring a lot of discredit to this government.
The Intellects have been too silent in their own comfortable cocoons, and in a manner rather cowardly, if I may add. This includes GL Peeris and Dayan Jayatillaka. Cowards of the first water they have been; unable to stand up for what is right.. See where they have got to; going so low on their knees! That coot Rajiwas Wijesinghe has no intellect and doesnt merit discussion.
I do criticize the wrongs Mr.Muzammil. I even wrote somewhere in this blog that Minister Lokuge (in spite of being a friend) must resign for he mishandled the whole pension episode pathetically. As for the leadership training program, I disagree with these learned writers but believe its a good start to put a stop to JVP ragging and other nonsense one day.
Why should I be concerned for army doing all what you wrote if their deployment would stop pandemonium?
Leela
I would like this country to be peaceful and stable first. Then prosperous at least to a degree where Malaysia is, before being concerned about apprehensions of your list.
Leela
educated … do not insult the lesser educated by calling them uneducated and mental retards!!!
Let me say this Mr. Leela, Albert etc. The real uneducated and mental retards do not try to infringe on highly sensitive and important issues like these their own retard version of thoughts. They naturally have an intelligence to perceive and appreciate what intelligent persons advocate. Every one of us has a commonsense to sense that this whole effort of regimentation is a perverted attempt to divert the attention of the country at this critical juncture to something trivial and thereby fooling a whole country and evading facing real issues locally and internationally.
Getting up early, washing face and brushing teeth, jumping over fences and off walls… who needs leadership training to do these things. Every child does these things in childhood. And leaders do not necessarily require jumping off walls to be leaders, and why need so much leaders for a country?
From nursery to university every child in the country is given all these aspects of education. If there is any deficiency of it, it could be supplemented during and within the existing system. Leadership aspects involving physical fitness and training is quite a different issue which has been already addressed in the existing system through sports, cadet teams, Baladaksha movement etc.
Military environment is an entirely different aspect of a country and involves transforming a civilian into a warrior. It is only those who have chosen themselves and been screened and selected to pursue that career that should enter military camps for resident training. Militarization of civilians in a country cannot whatsoever be advocated in a country unless it is heading for war, dictatorial governance or great conflicts in future. And when someone patronize these type of social, moral and democratic derogatory type of process and concepts he or they do it out of their lack of sound education and mental incapacity and retardness to understand the social and moral values and that is why the terms “uneducated” and “mental retards” were used.
I think some countries have compulsory military training for students between high school and University. Singapore , South Korea and Germany come to mind. I think all youngsters between high school and University should be given the option of performimg couple of months of rigorous social service or undergoing military training. A combination of both would be the best. Youngsters from the villages should be brought to the cities and those from the cities sent to the villagers. Also, Sinhalese students should be sent to the north and east and Tamils to the south.
The mollycoddled youth of Sri Lanka need exposure to the real world and the issues facing the counntry. We also as a people need to be instructed on social discipline, hard work and social responsibilty. These cannot be done by the Universities. There has to be an organized instrument to plan, organize and execute this task.
Unfortunately, Sri Lanka has a nasty tendency to politicize even noble objectives. Everything is done with self-seeking political objectives and are also viewed in a partisan manner by those opposed to the reigning powers.
Educational services, public services, health services and the security services should be dealt as national treasures and insulated against political interference and point scoring.
What has been instituted is good and very necessary, as a concept. How it is executed is a different matter.
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran
In General
The imposition of this leadership training program or any training program on the human community – with the exception of programs that train people to resist programming – is likely to interfere with the free evolutionary development of human being and therefore deserves to be resisted.
The education system has been a law unto itself in this respect, deciding what mental content and value systems the human species would be permitted to internalize, integrate and live by.
The concept of tolerance for alternatives and the creation of spaces for their emergence, consolidation and development has never been given serious consideration by the education system which has and continues for the most part to view such alternatives with fear and responded to them by doing its best to crush them.
The universities are now finding themselves at the receiving end of what they have consistently dished out to the human species for so long. I hope that this will be a learning experience for the education system and that it will lead to fundamental changes in this system which will be based on tolerance and the recognition and protection of alternative systems of learning, alternative mental content and values.
01. Crying out aloud at the ministries imposition of this training program rings hollow when those cries emanate from a system that has arbitrarily imposed its values and content on the human species leading to the current context where the human species is rapidly moving towards its own destruction precisely because of the content and values that have been imposed upon it by this education system that now cries out against such impositions.
The imposition of content and values is something that must be resisted but the education system cannot expect help from its own victims unless it is willing to engage in a serious effort to change its own ways. I see nothing of such a willingness expressed in this article.
Is the education system willing to enter into a dialogue aimed at changing its own autocratic and oppressive ways that are leading the human species towards its own destruction?
I would like to have a clear and unambiguous answer to that from those who have signed this document in order to decide whether their cause has any more merit than that of those who seek to impose this leadership training program upon the youth.
02 & 03 As far as I am concerned the accepted procedures referred to here are as oppressive as the imposition of this program and it is therefore a fight between pot and kettle as to who is black. Can either one of them explain why people should support one above the other?
04. What is being said here is essentially that leadership programs are acceptable as long as their content and values are determined by the education system and not by the Minister.
The dragging in of the concept of personality development only confuses the issue as personality development has nothing to do with leadership and in fact personality development is seriously hindered by leadership and the authoritarian tendencies and intolerance which are inherent to it.
Personality development also carries with it certain clinical connotations that are being widely used to marginalize certain perspectives and this is a weapon that going by its history the education system would love to wield.
All I see here is an attempt by the education system to preserve its hegemony over the definition, experience and expression of human being, which is to say what it is to be human.
05. Military training is founded upon physical regimentation and the training of reflexes – mostly functions of what can be called the animal and reptilian parts of our mental heritage. University training is funded upon the regimentation of ones mental content, perceptual parameters and values. One is in no way better or preferable to the other and in fact the two are complementary and have the same objective which is the limitation of the experience of what it is to be human and the extent to which human potential for evolutionary growth may be realized.
6. I have no idea how much “higher” the “seats” of learning to be found at universities are and what they are higher than. The very concept of a “seat” indicates a static state which totally contradicts the dynamic cosmic context we are generated by. I suspect that a considerable amount of energy is expended by universities to preserve the highness and heaviness of these seats and the heavy handed “learning” that sits upon them.
These high seats of the universities have indeed contributed greatly to what is going on and are directly responsible for leading the human species towards its own destruction.
7. The people who are responsible for challenging these fundamental rights are all products of the education system. The challenges that they mount against these rights arise from the values that they have integrated from the education system. Values are not necessarily communicated through text books and lectures. They are most often communicated through the way people live their lives and in this case especially those who occupy these high seats of heavy learning. I know for a fact that it is these people who occupy these high and heavy seats of learning who have created a generation of intolerant people by themselves leading intolerant lives.
The education system in Sri Lanka is one of the most violently intolerant ones I have ever encountered and not at all surprisingly it has generated a human community that values violent authoritarianism over tolerance.
8. Ragging is the outcome of the benevolence with which these high seats of learning encouraged the practice instead of engaging and transforming it. Thus leadership training will lead to a violent confrontation with raggers and then to forms of initiatory violence of its own which will be far worse than anything encountered in the form of ragging.
9. Discipline and self confidence will translate into a policy of violence against all opposition as it has always done and will continue to do. This is a poisonous seed of fascism and the high seats of learning that prepared the field for its reception are now becoming its first victims.
10. This is the kind of fundamentalism that is generated by discipline and self confidence
11. This is just an attempt on the part of the education system to preserve its hegemony over the experience and parameters of what it can be to be human and to determine and control the extent to which human potential may be realized.
This is not a project worth supporting.
What will be worth supporting as far as I am concerned is the generation of alternative systems of education where there are no higher and lower seats and where there are no teachers and students but a common inquiry by interested persons into what is going on and what we may do within it all.
It is the identification, support and facilitation of the emergence of such alternatives that is required to respond to the emerging context and this is something that should and could have been done long ago instead of being pre occupied with the highness of seats and their occupation. If this had been done we would have been spared the wars and the murders, the violence and the tortures, and the disappearances and destruction we have gone through. It is not too late to go beyond futile appeals to ministers to the patient and dedicated work that is required to find and nurture the seeds of change that can engage the growing authoritarian intolerance and generate a more creative context that will be a most effective response to discipline and self confidence and all the various types of fundamentalism – religious, cultural or ideological – that it generates.
How sweet that you are “deeply concerned”. and do something like file a case on the Principle of Academic freedom, ethics and values!
Praise the Lord for this contribution by Jayantha Dhanapala and Prof. Savithri Goonasekera with the valuable support of the group members. As told, this is the type of analysis Sri Lankans need today and need to continue for ever if we need to show what democracy and good governance means. All what was expressed are true and those who read it carefully can understand the level of danger our own children where pushed in to during this training. When the Government preaches against ragging; it looks like under the banner of Leadership Training, it has already done an official ragging. I believe this wouldn’t have been desired by the students,their parents and the University Authorities if the curriculum was given to them earlier. What is the Government going to achieve by not discussing its new proposals with those who are concerned? We remember the type of chaos including loss to a life and economy that was created by not going for an open discussion on the Pension Scheme. It was reported that one child had already broken her leg while at the physical training during the Leadership Taining. She might recover or might continue with an irrecoverable loss. Can we allow these types of undemocratic and unreliable governance to continue or are there any possibilities to engage into a responsible dialogue with the authorities basing on this document?
“Leadership” cannot be taught. “Leadership” is foisted on anyone who stands out among the ordinary,in any cause, in any nation or internationally.
The army cannot teach “leadership”.
The army can only teach the Art of War.
The students gained entry to university to learn of disciplines which will equip them in/for life, after graduation.
They did not enter to learn anything else.
This program, it appears from all accounts, was to wean them away from the habit of merciless ragging, to brainwash them about a few “great men” – including Mahida Rajapakse and accept the administration of universities without question.
If so, this should have been included as a part of the Requirements for University Entry.
Many then would not have accepted it.
Although the regime claims the aim of this regimentation is giving leadership training and ending ragging at campuses, its real motive is suppression of JVP movement because JVP sustains itself through conscription of university students to their movement and they use ragging to accomplish it. The youth cannot be blamed for it because their youthful genes so to speak are at a transformative stage at this age and because there are causes in their surroundings and society at large that keep them stirred and induce revolt against the system they naturally tend to accept JVP movement as an expression and a reaction to the issues in the system although the label necessarily may not be “JVP” on the face value.
So substituting government sanctioned ragging to suppress university ragging is not the way out if the government is wise enough as ragging involves a bigger picture. There is no smoke without a fire hence no youth and social uprising without real causes. The youth does have a say in social issues and must revolt against social injustices. Of what use is youthfulness if it is unable to understand the fallacy as fallacy, corruption as corruption, injustice as injustice? It is the responsibility of the government to address the root causes of the outward turbulence. The youth comes to the road and yells out “the education minister is a fool!, the king is a fool!, do not curtail labour rights!, do not kill workers!, restore democracy!” And one asks, are they wrong? Are their demands not related to real issues in the country? Obviously no! Obviously yes! And the government’s response must be real and relevant. But what does the government do? It begins issuing various contradictory statements, sends out thugs political and otherwise, use police and military force and destroys the rightful demands of its people. Is this democracy? Is this what the government must do to solve issues of its people? If the government does not reflect the wishes of its people, then it is time to create a people’s government. All over the world a sweeping wave of people’s revolution is taking shape uprooting people antagonistic regimes and dictators. Now is the time for SL to follow suit.
Very eye opening comments by Mr. Nirmalan Dhas. Yes, there must be evolution towards betterment of education system and the country needs a forum of capable souls to do that. But unfortunately nothing can be expected from the government in this direction which has the sole responsibility to do that. Instead of discharging its duties it is perpetually haunted by a familial rule and continuation of same.
The latest example is the recent discovery of arsenic in fertilizers and pesticides. Government gave its own version of excuse and explanation and totally blocked the independent analysis and revelation! Someone tread on the mud of a paddy field and falls ill, the hospital says one has caught “Ratfever”, they also say Ratfever is spread by rats’ urine in the paddy fields. But when you asks an old farmer they have never heard of such a fever in those early days.
The million dollar worth of question is: Do rats urinate tons upon tons of urine so that paddy fields are flooded and contaminated by it? Or does it give a clue suggestive of the authenticity of the recent discovery of arsenic in pesticides and fertilizer by a team of researchers which the government was quick to deny. So this our country Sri Lanka where thousands upon thousands of kidney patients are fast reaching graveyards of a mysterious kidney disease and the government is busy in preparing for the next commonwealth games to be held in president’s hometown spending billions of taxpayers money!
Education / Leadership
What we need are:
1. A vision for refined, cultured, altruistic, disciplined and value-based society.
2. Leadership of all sorts- technocrats, bureaucrats, academicians, politicians, religious, judicial, to create a new social order.
Extreme indiscipline which deliberately created due to ignorance, under the names and ideologies of various sorts to promote individual and group vested interests has sacrificed the greater interest of the people and country at the altar of expediency.
This indiscipline, manifested as two violent insurrections- one in the south and the other in the north, destroying values, culture and indigenous wisdom, while causing misery to all.
The above phenomenon originated and first manifested in the universities through dim witted student activists, who could behave like thugs when needed. Those behind these anarchists were faceless, but wielded their influence from within and outside the island.
Should this scenario, continue , if economic, moral, cultural, educational, spiritual standards are to be developed to achieve higher goals, good for everyone?
If individual and social discipline are to be the norm, future leaders should be disciplined. Acceptable norms have to be laid out and met. This process should start with educational institutions, at all levels, in the entire country, immediately.
This is the base for our future growth and progress- as a people and as an economy. A system of speedy punishments and rewards, have to has to be instituted at every level to weed the bad apples, encourage the worthy and prevent wastage of public resources.
Let us collectively put our house in order in a systematic manner to achieve higher efficiencies, enhanced performance and better human resource/man power/women power development at every level, taking note of the social pyramid, cultural pyramid, psychological pyramid and value pyramid , individually and collectively.
What the country yearns is a disciplined ,cultured, humane and productive society.
Old Yarlppanathan
[...] its inception, the programme came under criticism for its lack of transparency, accountability and consultation in the process of…. Criticism was also levelled against the overarching involvement of the military in the programme [...]
[...] its inception, the programme came under criticism for its lack of transparency, accountability and consultation in the process of…. Criticism was also levelled against the overarching involvement of the military in the programme [...]