The snub at Colombo University 

There is much discussion about the recent graduation ceremony at the University of Colombo, where several students refused to accept their scrolls from the recently appointed Chancellor, Muruththettuwe Ananda. 

The veteran trade unionist was a leading figure in the Opposition to the previous Yahapalana administration offering his temple at Narahanpita as the rallying point for the then Joint Opposition. Though heavily invested in the election of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and the eventual landslide parliamentary victory by the Sri Lanka Podu Jana Peramuna (SLPP) led by Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, the senior monk had since been severely critical of the Government on several fronts including privatisation, corruption, handling of the COVID pandemic, appointment of public officials and the cost of living.

The appointment of the monk to the prestigious, mostly ceremonial role as the Chancellor of the University of Colombo last month was seen by many as a means of silencing his growing criticism of the Government and particularly the president. In a moment of candour while addressing a public gathering, President Rajapaksa admitted that he had chosen the priest for the prestigious post since he had ‘worked’ to bring his political party into power. There is no doubt that the president has the prerogative to appoint anyone of his choosing as a chancellor to a State university. However, this has traditionally been an honour bestowed to persons of eminence, and particularly those who had excelled in academia. 

The University of Colombo which was previously known as the University of Ceylon and the University of Sri Lanka had many distinguished chancellors including Lord Soulbury, Sir Oliver Gunatilleke, Dr. P.R. Anthonis and his eminence Dr. Oswald Gomes. Two heads of state William Goppalawa and J.R. Jayewardene have also held the honorary post. 

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa can be excused for not being familiar with the rich academic history and traditions of Sri Lanka’s universities. He should have however been better advised when making an appointment of this nature. He ought to have considered the sentiments of the students and teachers of a university, who expect a Chancellor to embody and represent certain values. Appointing individuals on the sole criteria of political loyalty and patronage therefore should come with consequences.

Whatever the merits or demerits of appointing Muruththettuwe Ananda as Chancellor of the oldest university in Sri Lanka and the fact that he is a member of the clergy, does not preclude faculty and the student body from expressing an opinion regarding the appointment. 

The expression of political opinion and non-violent protest are rich traditions of a free society. It is through such non-violent protests that the freedom fighters of India and Sri Lanka achieved our independence. The moral and spiritual strength of satyagraha, a protest fast, conducted by Mohandas Gandhi was powerful enough to bring the mighty British empire to its knees. His calls for civil disobedience and salt marches are now the stuff of legend. The boycott of the UoC graduation ceremony by a group of lecturers and the refusal by some graduates to accept their scrolls from the Chancellor are very much part of this democratic, non-violent tradition of free expression and protest. Any attempt to curtail such expressions of free will must be resisted.  

On the same note, the manner in which the Vice Chancellor and the rest of the academic conducted themselves allowing those students who wished to mark their protest to do so while conducting the ceremony in a graceful and dignified manner should be particularly complimented. The University of Colombo has done itself proud and has nothing and no one to answer to for the manner in which it conducted its graduation ceremony recently.