28th June 1998

GCE (A/L) Commerce students’ dilemma

According to Circular No..98/15 of April 9, 1998 issued by the Department of Education, which was received only a few days ago due to the postal strikes, a student in the Commerce stream is not allowed to do Accountancy, Economics and Business Statistics. Instead of Business Statistics, a subject which is essential later on for Professional Accountancy Examinations such as CIMA or Chartered, he has been given a wide array of subjects such as French, German, Japanese, Chinese, English, Physics, Geography, Logic etc. which subjects have no relevance to his future higher studies.

A large number of parents do not want to send their children to the Universities today, particularly after they have heard the gruesome deaths of our students at our seats of higher learning.

Instead children are encouraged to select courses such as Accountancy, Banking, Marketing and Business Management.

Business Statistics is a subject which is widely used today in disciplines referred to above. It appears that those who have prepared this circular are not aware of this vital fact.

Accountants can still find very good jobs in this country whereas Doctors, Dental Surgeons and Engineers are unemployed. A large number of our Accountants are well employed in many parts of the world, bringing in valuable foreign exchange to Sri Lanka. Hence, it is the duty of the Government to give every assistance to our younger generation to take up careers such as Accountancy, Business Management, etc.

In view of the above, we humbly request the Minister of Education to amend the said circular so that a student who wants to do Accountancy, Economics and Business Statistics for G.C.E.[A/L, Exam is allowed to do so.

J. Jayawardena

Moratuwa.

Tourist Board ‘illagena kanawa’

I watched the initial broadcast of this programme on RTL2 some months ago. One should realize the RTL2 is both a satellite and a cable channel, and the coverage spreads to all of Western and Eastern Europe. This means the issue should not be taken lightly as a broadcast in Germany. It covered all of Europe, the main tourist market for Sri Lanka.

When I watched the program, though I was horrified to see how Sri Lanka was presented, at the time I thought there is nothing to be gained by protesting, as this was seen as an independent production from a German funded activity.

Reading the details of the background to this in The Sunday Times (on the internet) the last two weeks, I was more shocked and furious that the Sri Lanka Government has paid US$ 2.5 million for this “production”. On the lighter side this action reminds me of two Sinhala idioms. “illagena kanawa” and “uda balagena kela gaha gannawa”.

The Tourist Board claim they are “infuriated”, but the officer responsible and (who is credited in the film) cannot even be located. Tourist Board officials have accompanied the crew to Udawalawe to film wild life. The only wild life shown in the film coming from Uda Walawe was a python.

Close scrutiny shows the python scene was shot on the beach. After sending the crew to Uda Walawe, the Tourist Board could not even get some good wild life scenes.

Sri Lankan media professionals could have produced a better film. To add insult to injury, the TV producer PRISMA claims “artistic freedom”. On a $2.5 million tender, we should dictate what is produced.

If the government paid the money, the Tourist Board must have authorized the eventual screening of the film. What is the Tourist Board there for - to promote or tarnish our image?

We hear about corruption, but this is an act amounting to treachery. Even after paying $2.5 mn the worst publicity is generated. All those involved must, be interdicted forthwith and a full inquiry held immediately. One would assume that at the Tourist Board, some senior and junior heads should roll. But this is Sri Lanka nothing will happen, we keep on watching “cricket”.

Dr. Lalith Goonatilake

Vienna, Austria

Keep it up Mudliyar

Many senior lawyers in Hulftsdorp were very happy to read your column in The Sunday Times of June 7 regarding the ‘Independence of the Judiciary’. I have been reading recently J.A.L. Cooray’s latest volume on Constitutional and Administrative Law and his account on the Independence of the Judiciary at pp 519 ff. It might interest you in your continuation of this very important topic specially at the present time to note that at page 523 the author has cited Nihal Jayawickrama in the press. Dr. Cooray in his book states by way of illustrations of the independence and integrity of our judges Mr. Jayawickrama has cited three celebrated judicial pronouncements spanning over two centuries. Pages 523-524.

I was reading also another matter mentioned in the book which is of great topical interest namely with regard to the offence of Criminal Defamation regarding which there have been many recent prosecutions.

At page 686 Dr. Cooray has referred to Lord Diplock’s statement in a 1980 House of Lords case that this particular offence has retained anomalies which involve serious departures from accepted principles upon which the modern Criminal Law is based and is difficult to reconcile with the International obligation with which this country (England) has undertaken by becoming a party to the European Convention for the protection of Human Rights.

There are many other views contained in the book which are of current relevance, in addition to the exposition of the legal principles underlying the Constitution.

More strength, Mudliyar, to your elbow. Please keep it up!

Justinian

Not a trace of a “pukka sahib”!

Please permit me the use of a little space in your esteemed journal to record my appreciation of a man whom I have never met. He is none other than Sri Lankan cricket’s good friend, Tony Greig - the former England cricket captain, now turned a competent cricket commentator.

Tony Greig has not a trace of that “pukka sahib” mentality of his forefathers who boasted that they ruled the waves, while most of the time, they waived the rules. In this light, he is in the company of another British friend of Sri Lanka of yesteryear - Leonard Woolf.

Further, Tony’s ball-by-ball commentaries are impartial, interesting and informative. He describes each ball bowled, each stroke played, and every action of the fieldsmen, and perhaps, the umpires, most accurately, so that even listening to him with closed eyes, would, surely turn one into a wide-eyed ringside spectator; he explains the rules and shows how something should have been done, out there in the middle; he speaks his candid opinion, in the most gentlemanly way, without slighting the umpires, when decisions seem controversial.

To me, he is the 4th umpire, and his opinion seems to hold water. In this respect our own Bandula Warnapura, Eric Gauder and such others are not very far behind, it must be said.

Again, Tony endearignly calls Kaluwitharana, “Little Kaloo”, as if he were some Little Bo Peep. When Muralaitharan, partnering Kaluwitharane, surprisingly hit a boundary, Tony commented thus ‘Now,...... he thinks... why, if Kaloo could do it, why not I”. When Kaluwitharana rached his 50 the TV camera focussed on the young Mrs. Kaluwitharana, Tony commented: “Now, that’s the first smile on her face for today”.

Congratulations, Tony. It’s total commentary. Keep it up, for many moons to come.

Somaratne Edirisinghe

Kuliyapitiya

Return to the Letters to the Editor Contents

Return to the Plus Contents