Mano Writes to Sajith, Says Lakshman Kiriella’s Remarks on Tamil-Speaking People Were Wrong

14-Oct-2026

.

Tamil Progressive Alliance leader and Member of Parliament Mano Ganesan has criticised Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa over remarks reportedly made by senior Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) member Lakshman Kiriella during a meeting with the Mahanayake Thera of the Malwathu Chapter in Kandy.

Ganesan said it was entirely wrong to link Tamil- and Muslim-speaking Sri Lankans to the issue involving Gnanasara Thera. He also objected to Kiriella’s reported suggestion that the Government was using the Gnanasara Thera issue to appease Tamil-speaking people.

He said the use of terms referring to minorities as “sulu jathi” and the majority as “maha jathi” was inappropriate and that all parties should refrain from bringing Tamil and Muslim communities into discussions concerning the Gnanasara Thera issue.

In a letter addressed to Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa, Ganesan elaborated on his concerns.

He said he wished to express his disapproval of the remarks reportedly made by the party’s senior member during the meeting with the Mahanayake Thera in Kandy. At the same time, he congratulated the delegation for meeting the senior Buddhist prelate.

However, he said he was deeply concerned and disappointed by the reported remarks made by Lakshman Kiriella during the meeting.

According to the reports, Kiriella had stated that the Government was using the issue involving Gnanasara Thera to appease Tamil-speaking people and others outside the Sinhala Buddhist community.

Ganesan also expressed dissatisfaction with the use of outdated terminology to describe the Tamil and Muslim communities, which he said were inseparable parts of Sri Lanka’s pluralistic society and fellow citizens of the country.

He said such remarks reinforced divisive narratives and undermined the dignity of the people. He added that it was regrettable that such language had been used during a discussion with the country’s highest Buddhist religious leadership.

Ganesan said he believed that Gnanasara Thera’s imprisonment was consistent with the rule of law and that, on this basis, they had refrained from questioning the court’s decision.

He further stated that the presidential pardon previously granted to Gnanasara Thera had subsequently been found to be legally defective.

“If the incumbent President, after due consideration, rectifies those defects in accordance with the law and grants a fresh pardon by exercising the lawful powers of the Presidency, we would not oppose it. In principle, I would respect such action if it were properly undertaken within the limits of the law,” he said.

The recent controversy over the attire worn by Gnanasara Thera in prison had generated considerable public debate, Ganesan noted.

He said that, while the relevant process was under way, he had already made public appeals to Tamil-speaking Sri Lankans to refrain from commenting publicly on the matter.

As stated by the President, a committee had been appointed to examine the issue. The committee was expected to submit proposals within two weeks on possible amendments to the laws and regulations governing the clothing worn by inmates in state prisons.

Ganesan said the matter should be addressed through this process, with due respect for the law.

However, he stressed that these issues should not be conflated with his criticism of Kiriella’s remarks.

While individuals could hold differing views on the legal proceedings concerning Gnanasara Thera, he said, nothing in these matters justified the use of language that marginalised or demeaned Tamil and Muslim citizens.

He reiterated his deep dissatisfaction and regret over Kiriella’s reported remarks, expressing hope that his concerns would be understood in the constructive spirit in which the letter had been written.

Sri Lanka’s democratic future, he concluded, depended on the country’s ability to address contentious issues collectively without reviving divisive language from the past.