Asianet Pakistan Private Limited

The youngest Sri Lankan to reach Everest Base Camp, Jaith Adithya Nathavitharana, achieved this feat at just 15 years and 4 months. Now, he sets his sights on summiting Mount Elbrus, the tallest mountain in Europe, and Mount Vinson, the tallest in Antarctica. At 13, on 10 August 2023, Jaith summited Stella Point of Mount Kilimanjaro and pledged to himself to climb the Seven Summits, including Everest Base Camp, sooner rather than later. Mount Elbrus in Russia stands at 18,510 ft, while Mount Vinson reaches 16,050 ft.

‘As cliché as it may sound, I am truly proud of myself. Strengthened by the lion’s might, it was an amazing experience overall, and being the youngest there is simply the cherry on top,’ he says with a sense of achievement. A Year 9 student at Colombo International School Kandy with a penchant for History, Business Studies, and Biology, Jaith relied on his sports background in football and badminton to build stamina and endurance.

‘In comparison to summiting Kilimanjaro, Everest Base Camp was truly more special. It was less rushed and more relaxed. We stayed about 30 minutes, taking photographs and enjoying the surroundings, whereas on Kilimanjaro, it was five minutes, one photograph, and then turnaround.’ Jaith, who collects ornamental fish and plays video games as hobbies, also swims and plays chess, adding to his vast extracurricular repertoire, which includes being a member of the Model United Nations.

While the adrenaline rush of seeing the words ‘Everest Base Camp’ etched into the rock is hard to express in words, Jaith, who felt a mix of joy, achievement, and shock at having reached the Base Camp, also had some grounding moments on the climb. ‘The lives led by the mountain people on Everest and other peaks in the region were shocking. The Sherpas, for instance, earn barely enough to live even though they carry 15 to 30 kg on a given trip. The Everest region feels like time has stood still. There are no cars, no running water, and yaks and mules are used for ferrying necessities, while these Sherpas climb to and fro to earn their living. It’s not an easy life for them.’

Jaith recalls that the biggest challenge was the altitude, with breathing becoming harder as the climb grew steeper. ‘We would usually start climbing at about 6:30 a.m., walking an average of seven hours daily. The higher we went, the more difficult the days became, and those final days were truly challenging – fighting altitude and fatigue, which hit me in the last few days.’

He does, however, acknowledge that memories are not just made of reaching Base Camp. ‘Visiting tea houses, crossing suspension bridges, climbing alongside mules and yaks, soaking in the beautiful landscape of glaciers and temples, experiencing the spiritual side of the mountain, and meeting experienced mountaineers who kept encouraging me – all of these are memories I will cherish. It is amazing how every climber becomes a part of the mountain and the culture in the region. The experience truly helped me bond more with my father and this climb was special because it was my way of getting back at him for Kili,’ he adds with a smile.

Though his career ambition is not ‘mountain-oriented’ but rather focused on becoming a professional footballer playing in the Champions League one day, Jaith says he will not attempt an Everest climb again. ‘It’s a little too nerve-wracking and has too many negatives. But I am preparing for the next two climbs – the tallest in Europe and the tallest in Antarctica.’

Grateful for the support his teachers and friends extended to ensure he didn’t miss any schoolwork while away, Jaith encourages other young people to try mountaineering. ‘Just remember, once you start, there’s no going back – as one person on the mountain told me. All you need is a trekking pole and good layering. From there, it becomes an addiction. It is truly a soul-cleansing experience, builds self-confidence, and is a very useful way to find yourself.’

The Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) yesterday launched a new digital Case Tracking System aimed at improving transparency, efficiency, and accountability.

CIABOC Chairman Justice Neil Iddawala described the new platform as ‘a transformative step’ that goes beyond a mere technological upgrade. He said the system represents a major shift in how the Commission manages and processes information, records, and case files central to its work.

‘Corruption thrives where there is opacity, delay, and inefficiency. Transparency and accountability are the strongest deterrents,’ Justice Iddawala said, calling the new system ‘an instrument of reform’ that will strengthen public trust.

The Case Tracking System integrates automation and centralised digital recordkeeping to improve accuracy, enable real-time case monitoring, and streamline workflows. It also introduces data-driven decision-making tools to enhance institutional performance.

The project was implemented with financial assistance from the Government of Japan and technical support from the UNDP. Addressing CIABOC staff, Justice Iddawala encouraged officers to embrace the new system, noting that it empowers them to work with greater precision and professionalism. ‘Each keystroke is a contribution to CIABOC’s mission-to build a cleaner, fairer, and more transparent society,’ he said.

The launch aligns CIABOC’s operations with international best practices and Sri Lanka’s commitments under the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC).

Sri Lanka GDP growth rate needs to rise above 8% over 10 years to achieve a GDP of $ 200 million and a GDP per capita of $ 9,000 to qualify as an upper middle-class status. A high-income status requires a per capita of $ 13,846 or more. Can Sri Lanka achieve these targets? It is noteworthy that Singapore GDP in 2024 was $ 547.4 billion and per capita $ 90,674.07 while Sri Lanka’s GDP was $ 98.96 billion with a per capita of $ 4,515.57. Singapore’s projected GDP will be $ 900 billion in 10 years with a per capita of $ 130,000. Sri Lanka must decide where it wishes to be in 10 years

Despite some economic progress in Sri Lanka over the years, the fact that the country was declared bankrupt in 2022 negates such achievements from the point of view of sustainability of the country’s economy and shows a structural weakness in economic fundamentals. Excessive borrowings for projects without a proper return on investment assessments, spending far in excess of actual costs for infrastructure projects, operational expenditure in excess of income, accumulating large foreign debts and using some such borrowings especially International Sovereign Bonds for consumption rather than for specific projects with a return on the borrowings in excess of the cost of borrowing, are but some of these structural shortcomings.

Thanks to the often-criticised entry of the IMF, Sri Lanka has been able to instil some financial discipline in economic management and virtually compel the Governments since 2022 to adhere to an economic framework in return for the $ 2.9 billion bailout package negotiated with them. It is well for those who were and still are critical of the IMF to remember that their entry was a result of successive Government’s financial indiscipline and politically influenced monetary policies, and had economic fundamentals been strategic and sustainable, there would not have been a necessity to seek IMF assistance to save the country and assist it to overcome its bankruptcy.

Foreign reserves

Trading Economics (https://tradingeconomics.com/sri-lanka/foreign-exchange-reserves) states that foreign exchange reserves in Sri Lanka were $ 6.107 billion in August 2025 and Singapore’s foreign exchange reserves were SGD 502.02 billion (approximately $ 390 billion) in August 2025 (https://tradingeconomics. com/singapore/foreign-exchange-reserves). The total reserves of Singapore based on publicly available data from Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC), the Government of Singapore owned multinational investment firm Temasek Holdings (Private) Limited, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), and government’s Central Provident Fund (CPF), are conservatively estimated at S$ 2.5 trillion (2024) (US$ 1.87 trillion). Many analysts believe that the reserves are substantially larger than publicly acknowledged. The Ministry of Finance keeps the full details of the reserves private so as to prevent currency speculation attacks on the Singapore dollar.

Individually, besides the government foreign reserves of $ 390 billion, GIC’s portfolio value was estimated at approximately $ 800 billion as of May 2025 according to the Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute (SWFI), Temasek Holding portfolio S$ 434 billion (US$ 287 billion) as of 31 March 2025. (https://www.temasek.com.sg/en/news-and-resources/news-room/news/2025/temasek-net-portfolio-value-grows-to-record-high-of-434-billion), and as per Wikipedia, CPF managed a portfolio of US$ 463 billion (S$ 594 billion) for 4.2 million account holders.

Sri Lanka’s foreign reserves are woefully inadequate as it can only fund about 2 months of imports to the country. This period will be less when the debt capital and interest payments are considered. Singapore too has a substantial gross external debt, reportedly over S$ 2.4 trillion, but possesses zero net debt because its substantial financial assets-like foreign currency reserves far exceeds its liabilities. Unlike in Sri Lanka, the high gross external debt reflects Singapore’s status as a major global financial hub, attracting large amounts of international deposits and investments, primarily held by private corporations rather than the Government.

If Sri Lanka is to move to a different and higher economic platform, its thinking, meaning people’s thinking, their attitudes, as well as those of politicians and officials, has to change and none should harbour a view that doing the same thing expecting different results, simply will work. While economic data is not easy to find in 1948 when Sri Lanka became independent, Wikipedia reports that in 1960 Sri Lanka’s (then Ceylon) per capita GDP was 152 dollars, Korea 153, Malaysia 280, Thailand 95, Indonesia 62, Philippines 254, Taiwan 149. Singapore’s GDP per capita in 1960 was approximately $ 395 to $ 428 USD. The Monetary Authority of Singapore says that in 1965, when Singapore became an independent nation, its nominal GDP per capita was around US$ 500.

No doubt in 77 years since independence, Sri Lanka has moved along progressively to reach a per capita of $ 4,515.57 by 2024. However, Singapore since its independence in 1965 has moved from $ 500 to $ 90,674.07 in 60 years.

The history, culture, politics, demographics, the geography, the country size, its agriculture and crop diversification and many other factors are vastly different in Sri Lanka and Singapore, and it is perhaps not a fair comparison to make when it comes to the economic status quo of the two countries. However, some fundamental comparisons can and should be made about the basic, logical economic management policies and outcomes irrespective of the differences mentioned earlier. In fact, some of these differences are advantages enjoyed by Sri Lanka over Singapore although the outcomes and returns from these advantages have been very much less than optimal. The population density of the two countries and the land areas illustrate a distinct advantage that Sri Lanka has, and not capitalised, and how Singapore has used less to make more within these two challenging realities.

Singapore’s population density is approximately 8,387 people per square kilometres (or 21,722 people per square mile) as of mid-2025, making it one of the most densely populated countries in the world. This high density is a result of careful long-term planning to manage land scarcity in the city-state of 700 square kilometres. Sri Lanka’s population density is approximately 370 people per square kilometres (959 people per square mile) as of 2025. This density is based on a total land area of 62,710 square kilometres.

Future economic trajectory for Sri Lanka

While GDP and GDP per capita are arguably not the best measures to judge a country’s economic health, they are the measures used globally to do so at present. Some argue that these measures represent the thinking of international institutions like the World Bank and IMF, and that they represent the viewpoint of Western economies led by the USA.

Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics and University Professor at Columbia University, former chief economist of the World Bank (1997-2000), former chair of the US President’s Council of Economic Advisers, former co-chair of the High-Level Commission on Carbon Prices, and lead author of the 1995 IPCC Climate Assessment and Co-Chair of the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation and the author, most recently, of The Road to Freedom: Economics and the Good Society (W. W. Norton and Company, Allen Lane, 2024) says in an article published in the Scientific American ‘GDP measures everything,’ as Senator Robert Kennedy once said, ‘except that which makes life worthwhile.’

The number does not measure health, education, equality of opportunity, the state of the environment or many other indicators of the quality of life. It does not even measure crucial aspects of the economy such as its sustainability: whether it is headed for a crash’. (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gdp-is-the-wrong-tool-for-measuring-what-matters/). Readers are referred to an article written by this writer titled GDP and GDP growth: Are they measures that really matter? (https://www.ft.lk/opinion/GDP-and-GDP-growth-Are-they-measures-that-really-matter/14-774796), to get a brief idea about statistics on a range of underlying disparities, inequalities and inequities amongst its people despite ‘developments’ visible to the naked eye.

However, at the end of the day, there are some fundamentals to consider irrespective of arguments for or against the contention that GDP alone being a measure of the economic health of a country. Amongst some of them are affordability by the entire population of a quality, modern universal healthcare, a good education system, that widens and deepens knowledge and prepares the younger generation to be more self-reliant, technological advancements including Artificial Intelligence and access to them, efficient and affordable transportation, quality housing for all, food security, absence of poverty and malnutrition, and ability for all to live in a free and non-violent, equal and equitable society. Clearly achieving some of these ideals need substantial amounts of monetary investments and therefore strategic, out of the box, economic thinking, policies and effective and efficient economic management becomes paramount.

While Sri Lanka has achieved a high standard in many areas such in education and health in particular, its overall economic management has not been satisfactory and in fact, if the country and all its people are to achieve a higher, sustainable quality of life, the entire country, not just its politicians, need to move towards a substantial paradigm shift in economic thinking. Sri Lanka rising to a higher economic platform in effect means a rise in GDP, and in 10 years it will depend on its economic growth rate between 2025 and 2035.

The GDP growth forecast for 2025 is 3-4%, and for 2026 is around 5%. With a starting point of $ 99 billion GDP in 2024, and assuming a sustained growth rate of around 4%, Sri Lanka’s GDP would be approximately $ 147 billion in 2035 and a per capita of $ 6300.00.

The question has to be asked whether this is sufficient for people to enjoy a better-quality of life and whether it is sufficient to renew confidence in the country amongst its current and future generations.

If one were to consider the current per capita GDP of $ 97,604.00 in Singapore, and if Sri Lanka is to achieve at least half of it ($ 45,000), Sri Lanka’s GDP would need to be approximately $ 990 billion This would require a tenfold increase from the 2024 GDP of $ 99 billion to achieve the desired per capita figure. Achieving such a figure would seem an impossibility based on where the country is placed now. However, the policy makers and the people should at least target to achieve the World Banks’s classification of a higher income country, which is a per capita in excess of $ 13,846, which is a tripling the country’s current per capita of $ 4,515.00. This would require an increase in GDP to approximately $ 300 billion from the current $ 99 billion.

The current trajectory of predicted GDP growth around 4-5% is not sufficient to give the people in the country anywhere near what is required to provide the economic and social ideals mentioned earlier. Whilst the Government has outlined plans to increase exports, earnings from tourism, and foreign investments, all of which are very commendable, this article wishes to suggest that a more dramatic paradigm shift is needed in economic thinking, strategy and management if the country is to move towards a high-income country. A few key areas are mentioned for purpose of discussion

Industrialisation and agriculture – Focussed on food security and exports

Value adding industrialisation for local consumption but more importantly for exports.

Further development of the fisheries industry, for local consumption and exports

Moving from traditional approaches relating to the tea, coconut and rubber industry and venturing into research based higher yields using less land, maximisation of water resources and replacing unproductive plantations with alternate crops,

Intercropping where two or more crops simultaneously in the same field to improve land use, increase yields, reduce risk, and enhance biodiversity. Coconut plantations are a good example where intercropping could be done with coffee, cocoa and other suitable crops between coconut trees.

Finance – Increased investments and foreign reserves

Increase foreign reserves by providing incentives to exporters and those remitting foreign exchange by buying the foreign exchange from them at a higher premium over normal bank interest rates.

Creating a government owned foreign reserve management entity (for a component of the government foreign reserves) on the lines of entities in Singapore, enabling it to invest in select fund management entities.

Creating a National Investment Bank with private sector equity participation and dedicated exclusively to engage in investments both locally and overseas

Private sector – Greater role for the private sector as the engine of growth

Consideration given to creating an exclusive ministry headed by a high-level cabinet minister to plan and promote growth of a sustainable private enterprise in the country.

Community Service Responsibility activity – providing tax benefits to companies engaging in priority projects of the government with a view to achieving long term sustainability of such projects.

Transforming diplomatic services to be commercially oriented to attract investments and promote exports

Appoint commercially astute diplomats (High Commissioners, Ambassadors) to key overseas postings to coordinate investment interests amongst potential investors, both citizens of the respective countries as well as amongst Sri Lankan expatriates in such countries.

Conclusion

Sri Lanka has to develop its economy in order to provide a fair, equitable, healthy, knowledgeable and dignified lifestyle for its citizens and its future generations. It needs to provide enough opportunities to them and foster their confidence in the country. While the country’s long history and its rich colourful culture are important in shaping the identity of the country, it also needs to think of the future and how it will provide a safe, secure and healthy environment for its people in a sustainable manner. Sri Lanka does not have to emulate any other country as the uniqueness of Sri Lanka in terms of its natural beauty, history and culture provides an enviable environment for it to grow its economy to provide a more quality future for its people. However, it needs resources, both financial and capable human resources to provide a future for its emerging generations. The country has to earn more, save more and equip itself more to provide the outcomes that are desired. Its thinking therefore has to be futuristic and strategic and not confined to yesterday’s glory days. Economic policies have to look towards the future and not be focussed on the past.

The United Nations Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) yesterday raised serious concerns over Sri Lanka’s limited progress in addressing thousands of unresolved disappearance cases, weak accountability mechanisms, and inadequate forensic capacity in investigating mass graves.

In its latest findings released after reviewing Sri Lanka’s implementation of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Committee noted that the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) has traced only 23 individuals out of 16,966 registered cases. It said this reflects a ‘high level of impunity’ and a lack of progress in investigating and prosecuting alleged enforced disappearances, including those that occurred during the armed conflict.

The Committee urged the Government to create a comprehensive and updated register of disappeared persons and to strengthen the OMP’s mandate to investigate and ensure accountability in all registered cases. It also called for the inclusion of war crimes and crimes against humanity within domestic legislation and the expedited establishment of an independent Office of the Public Prosecutor.

Expressing concern over the discovery of at least 17 mass graves across the country, the Committee said Sri Lanka’s limited forensic capacity and absence of centralised ante-mortem and post-mortem databases hinder proper investigation. It recommended developing a national genetic database and building forensic capacity across competent authorities to locate, identify, and safeguard human remains, ensuring their dignified return to families.

The Committee’s observations follow its latest session in Geneva, where Sri Lanka’s progress under the Convention was reviewed alongside other State parties.

Economist and Arutha Research Director – Civic Education Rehana Thowfeek said Sri Lanka must stop repeating the mistakes of the past and commit to an open, outward-looking trade policy if it wants to escape recurring economic crises.

Speaking at the Annual Conference on Public Sector Reforms for Economic Revival, organised by CA Sri Lanka and the Association of Public Finance Accountants of Sri Lanka, she said the country has no choice but to ‘trade its way to recovery.’

‘Trade for Sri Lanka is not just about growth anymore. It is about survival,’ Thowfeek said. ‘The fuel queues, gas shortages, and medicine crises of 2022 were all connected to our inability to earn enough foreign exchange through trade.’

She noted that Sri Lanka has long suffered from a balance of payments deficit because imports have consistently exceeded exports. ‘Before the default, we spent 30 to 35% of our export revenues just on debt servicing,’ she said. ‘We cannot meaningfully reduce our nominal debt stock, so the only way forward is to grow the denominator, GDP, by expanding industries, exports, and jobs.’

She pointed out that public debt exceeded 100% of GDP before the 2022 default and will still remain around 92% of GDP by 2030, even after debt restructuring.

‘While there is some relief from extending debt maturities, the burden is still very high. We must now focus on growing the economy, and that means focusing on exports,’ she said.

Thowfeek said Sri Lanka’s economic history offers clear lessons on what works and what fails.

‘By 1977, Sri Lanka was a closed and inward-looking economy with high tariffs, rationing, and foreign exchange controls,’ she said. ‘The people were dissatisfied, and the economy had stagnated. Liberalisation changed that trajectory. Exports became the engine of growth and the economy shifted from agriculture to manufacturing.’

But over the past two decades, she said, Sri Lanka has reversed direction.

‘There has been a noticeable shift towards protectionism, with para-tariffs and import restrictions that created an anti-export bias, making it more lucrative to sell domestically than to export.’

As a result, the country’s export base has stagnated.

‘The share of exports in GDP has fallen from around 30% at the start of the millennium to about 20% in recent years, and our share of global exports has declined sharply,’ she said. ‘Our export basket remains concentrated in three products-apparel, tea and rubber-and our markets are limited to the US, UK, and EU.’

She contrasted Sri Lanka’s experience with countries such as Vietnam and Cambodia, which liberalised later but have since expanded rapidly.

‘Vietnam and Cambodia opened their economies nearly 10 years after us, yet their trade has surged since the 1990s while ours has declined,’ she said.

‘Sri Lanka’s high-tech exports account for only 1.5% of manufactured exports, compared to 46% in Vietnam and more than 50% in Malaysia and Singapore. These countries attracted foreign investment, integrated into global supply chains, and negotiated multiple effective trade agreements. We did the opposite, and the results are clear.’

Thowfeek said that despite being one of the first South Asian countries to open up, Sri Lanka has regressed into a closed and inward-looking economy.

‘By 2022, we had import bans, exchange controls, and even talk of self-sufficiency. Exports have stagnated, and our lack of diversification has left us vulnerable,’ she said. ‘Einstein said that doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity. That is exactly what Sri Lanka has been doing.’

She argued that people expect simple outcomes from economic policy: better jobs, stable prices, and a decent standard of living.

‘Trade is one of the most powerful levers to achieve this,’ she said. ‘But Sri Lanka’s policies have focused on dividing a small pie, not growing it. The question should have been how to make the pie bigger so that everyone benefits.’

Turning to the way forward, Thowfeek said Sri Lanka must make use of trade policy for trade objectives rather than using it to generate revenue or serve narrow interests.

‘There is a national export strategy in the works, but the real test will be implementation,’ she said. ‘We need to work on trade facilitation measures, whether that means fewer bureaucratic procedures, more digitisation, or better infrastructure. We should establish a dedicated office to take over trade negotiations and ensure that trade agreements are effectively implemented. Countries that have succeeded in growing their exports all have such institutions.’

She also called for leveraging and expanding Sri Lanka’s limited number of trade agreements, improving education and skill development, and preparing for technological shifts. ‘We must re-skill people, including in the public sector, and prepare for the Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution. We need to move up value chains and start targeting high-tech exports,’ she said.

Sri Lanka exported $ 12.7 billion in goods and services in 2024 while importing $ 18.8 billion, resulting in a trade deficit of about $ 6 billion. ‘We can’t close that gap by borrowing. We have to earn our way out by trading more, producing more, and integrating better,’ Thowfeek said.

She also warned of growing global risks, including shifting trade patterns and tariff shocks.

‘When the US imposed a 44% tariff on Sri Lankan exports earlier this year, later reduced to 20%, it exposed how vulnerable we are because 25% of our exports go to the US. If we are so against the US putting high tariffs on our exports, why do we do it to other countries? Is that fair?’ she asked.

Thowfeek warned that reforms are no longer optional but essential. ‘Sri Lanka has been here before. The 1970s were a lesson, and history shows that openness worked for us. Protectionism has hurt us,’ she said. ‘We cannot borrow our way out of a crisis or protect our way to prosperity. The only sustainable path is to open up, diversify, and trade our way to recovery.’

Colombo stock market yesterday extended its rally into a 15th session, opening the four-day week in green on improving investor optimism.

The ASPI closed 0.31% up yesterday, gaining 68.34 points to 22,163.23 while the active S and P SL20 gained 0.07% to close up 4.03 points to 6,191.54. Turnover was Rs. 7.95 billion on more than 247 million shares traded.

Foreign investors were net sellers with a net outflow of Rs. 223.3 million, up from a Rs. 149 million outflow on Friday with the market closed on Monday for Poya.

First Capital Research said continuing the bullish leap of the previous week, the Colombo Stock Exchange demonstrated an upward momentum, driven by rising investor optimism. Banking sector counters, coupled with blue-chip companies exerted a positive pressure on the ASPI, which closed the day at 22,163, after registering a gain of 68 points.

LION, SPEN, MELS, BREW and SAMP were the top positive contributors to the index. While both retail and HNW participation remained elevated during the day, turnover stood at Rs. 8 billion, reflecting an increase of 16% compared to the monthly average that stands at around Rs. 6.9 billion.

Banking sector took the lead in terms of sector wise contributions to turnover, with a share of 24%, followed by Capital Goods sector and Diversified Financials sector, which produced a combined contribution of 27%. Foreign investors remained net sellers, recording a net outflow of Rs. 223.3 million.

John Keells CG Auto, the authorised distributor for DENZA in Sri Lanka, has announced the upcoming launch of luxury electric vehicle brand with over a decade of innovation excellence. DENZA is set to bring refined elegance and luxury to Sri Lankan drivers through its premium New Energy Vehicle (NEV) offerings.

Pre-bookings for DENZA are now live, ahead of the brand’s upcoming official launch. Ideal for customers seeking quiet luxury and intelligent, high performance NEVs, the announcement marks another milestone in Sri Lanka’s automotive industry, and for JKCG Auto’s continuing mission to accelerate Sri Lanka’s sustainable mobility transition.

DENZA’s Sri Lankan portfolio features three distinct luxury models designed for different customer preferences. The DENZA D9 offers premium family transportation as a luxury electric MPV, while the DENZA B8 and B5, an adventurous plug-in hybrid, cater to customers seeking high-performance mobility with advanced safety and technological features.

Each model in the DENZA line-up represents the brand’s unwavering commitment to delivering exceptional build quality, innovative technology, and the refined luxury experience that defines premium electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles.

‘Ever since BYD entered Sri Lanka, it has quickly become the island’s most popular NEV brand, reflecting the unmatched value we deliver in performance and the overall driving experience. With DENZA, we are elevating that promise into the luxury segment. Sri Lanka joins a select group of international markets including Singapore, the UK, and Hong Kong in offering DENZA, and we’re incredibly proud of this achievement.’

‘DENZA delivers one of the most sophisticated premium NEV experiences available today anywhere in the world: refined dynamics, intelligent electric performance and a cabin designed for exceptional passenger comfort. It is, in every sense, the complete package, and we are excited to introduce this remarkable brand to our discerning Sri Lankan customer base,’ JKCG Auto CEO Charith Panditharatne said.

Sri Lankan customers can experience DENZA’s advanced technology first-hand during pre-bookings starting 1 October at Cinnamon Lakeside, with the official launch scheduled soon. With this launch, DENZA reaffirms its commitment to advancing sustainable luxury new energy mobility and supporting Sri Lanka’s transition to cleaner transportation solutions.

The partnership between DENZA and John Keells CG Auto was formalised through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in June.

JKCG Auto is committed to delivering an exceptional customer experience throughout the entire ownership journey, establishing a comprehensive 3S solution featuring sophisticated showrooms, state-of-the-art service centres, and readily available spare parts for Sri Lankan customers.

Sustainability has emerged as one of the most critical strategic imperatives of our era, particularly in nations acutely exposed, with economies closely tied to delicate natural and social ecosystems. Sri Lanka, with its rich agricultural exports and thriving apparel sector, finds itself at a pivotal crossroads. As we approach tangible evidence of sustainability progress from both nations and corporates, Sri Lankan enterprises must recognise that the foundations they lay today will determine their ability to respond credibly to these demands.

If organisations wait until the last minute and rely solely on a compliance-centric approach rather than embedding a purpose-driven sustainability dimension into their business strategy, Sri Lankan corporates face a critical turning point. These robust reporting requirements establish a new baseline and align local practices with evolving global expectations. However, there is a real risk that organisations may revert to a box-ticking, compliance-focused mindset, merely meeting minimum standards rather than driving meaningful transformation.

For Sri Lankan companies to truly future-proof themselves, sustainability must be recognised as a core business imperative, one that goes beyond compliance and includes the active inclusion of sustainability professionals in strategic decision-making roles.

Investing in resilience

Sri Lanka’s economy is anchored in climate-exposed sectors, including tea, rubber, coconuts, cinnamon, essential oils, fruits, apparel, gemstones, and tourism. These industries are central to foreign exchange and employment, yet they face mounting disruption from erratic rainfall, prolonged droughts, flooding, and shifting pest and disease patterns. The risks extend well beyond production: agriculture and mining depend on healthy rural labour, while extreme heat and flooding compromise factory productivity, worker health, and community well-being in general. Heavy rainfall can paralyse logistics, making climate risk a systemic threat to livelihoods, competitiveness, and national prosperity.

Corporate responses in the past were often framed as philanthropy or CSR, disconnected from strategy and risk management. That approach is no longer sufficient. Sustainability must be embedded into business models through a risk lens and as a resilience driver. When integrated into operations, product design, supply chains, and governance, sustainability shifts from vulnerability management to preparedness. Measuring outcomes in financial, environmental, and social terms reframes it from a cost to an investment; one that protects markets, secures supply chains, and creates a durable advantage in a world where resilience is fast becoming the true measure of competitiveness.

IFRS S1 and S2 as the starting line, not the finish

The introduction of IFRS S1 and S2 is a watershed moment for Sri Lanka. These standards require companies to identify, assess, and disclose material sustainability risks and opportunities. For many corporates, mainly those new to formal sustainability reporting, this represents a significant learning curve and a valuable catalyst, not the destination, but a milestone on a much longer journey.

For Sri Lankan companies, especially those in sectors directly exposed to environmental and social volatility, compliance should be seen as a crucial milepost. Meeting these requirements presents an opportunity to build foundational capacity, establish governance structures, gather relevant data, and foster a culture of transparency and continuous improvement. But the true value lies beyond compliance. Companies must use the insights gained from reporting to drive real change. This means embedding sustainability into strategy, operations, innovation, and value propositions. It means setting ambitious goals for decarbonisation, resource efficiency, and social impact. And it means holding leaders and teams accountable for progress, not just disclosures.

A leap into the unknown

Unlike many advanced jurisdictions, Sri Lanka had not previously made it in line with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). Boards, executives, and sustainability leaders are navigating new requirements, unfamiliar reporting frameworks, and heightened stakeholder scrutiny, all while contending with immediate operational challenges. This context presents both risks and opportunities.

To succeed, companies must invest in the data systems and processes required for robust reporting. This includes mapping value chains, engaging with suppliers, and developing the internal capacity to collect, analyse, and act on sustainability information. Just as importantly, companies must foster a culture that embraces transparency, experimentation, and learning, recognising that the path to true sustainability is iterative and dynamic.

The buck must stop somewhere

One of the most vital components of effective sustainability integration is the assignment of clear responsibility and the embedding of accountability at every level where it is assumed. It is not enough to designate sustainability officers or create specialised committees. Every individual or team responsible for a segment of the sustainability agenda must be empowered and held accountable to deliver outcomes, not merely perform activities. Accountability is delivered through clear role descriptions and expectations, regular performance reviews, integration of sustainability goals into incentive structures, and transparent reporting to regulators and all stakeholders.

Boards and executive teams must lead by example, setting the tone for responsible behaviour and enforcing consequences for failure to meet targets. Transparent reporting is also essential. Progress toward sustainability objectives must be disclosed not only to regulators but also to all stakeholders, including employees, investors, customers, and the broader public. This transparency builds trust, creates a sense of shared purpose, and motivates continuous improvement.

Upskilling Boards and C-suites for a new era

Leadership is a decisive factor in the success of sustainability integration. In Sri Lanka, where familiarity with global sustainability frameworks is still developing, it is imperative to invest in the knowledge, skills, and mindsets of Board Members and C-suite executives. Targeted education and capacity building are vital. These efforts should include ESG fundamentals and their relevance to local and global markets, strategic foresight and scenario planning for climate and social risks, stakeholder engagement and communication, innovation and change management, and integrating sustainability into business strategy, risk management, and operational planning.

Regular training, partnerships with universities and thought leadership groups, and participation in international peer networks can help build this capacity. Boards may also consider recruiting directors with specialist expertise in sustainability, risk, or climate science. True integration requires that sustainability be incorporated into board mandates and decision-making processes. Committees focused on sustainability should have clear authority and adequate resources, and their recommendations must be effectively integrated into the company’s strategy and operations.

Third-party assurance and eliminating greenwashing

With global attention on sustainable business practices, the temptation to exaggerate or misrepresent achievements, better known as ‘greenwashing’, has become a significant risk. To counter this, companies must subject their sustainability disclosures and claims to rigorous third-party assurance. Independent verification of data and performance not only enhances credibility but also helps identify areas for improvement. Companies should also avoid ‘greenhushing’ by reporting legitimate progress honestly and encouraging balanced communication about successes and challenges.

Effective regulation and governance should foster transparent communication, creating an environment where companies strive for genuine impact, rather than maintaining a perfect public image.

Export markets and the cascading effect of value chain sustainability

Sri Lanka’s export economy faces mounting expectations from global buyers and consumers, who are increasingly demanding sustainability throughout the entire value chain. For manufacturers and producers, this means demonstrating traceability, environmental stewardship, and social responsibility at every stage, from sourcing raw materials to delivering finished products. Stricter regulations and standards in Europe, North America, and Asia, as well as requirements for third-party certification, emissions reductions, and responsible labour practices, are key factors shaping strategic decisions. These factors include the risks of losing contracts, reputational damage, and barriers to market entry.

For Sri Lankan companies, this is both a challenge and an opportunity. Those who can credibly demonstrate sustainable practices gain a competitive edge and can command premium prices in certain markets. Moreover, building sustainable value chains can open new markets, foster long-term buyer relationships, and increase supply chain resilience. Collaborative approaches are essential, including collaboration within and across industries to establish common standards, joint investments in traceability systems, collective bargaining for sustainable materials, and industry-wide worker welfare programs. Sector-wide initiatives can accelerate progress and reduce costs for all participants.

Innovation, circularity, and product life-cycle management

Sustainability-driven innovation is essential for future-proofing Sri Lankan companies, especially in a climate-exposed context, where traditional products and processes may become obsolete or untenable. Embracing circular economy principles means developing agricultural products resilient to climate shocks and processed with minimum waste, designing apparel and manufacturing products with modularity and repairability, and creating systems for collecting, refurbishing, or recycling products at the end of their life cycle. Such approaches reduce environmental impact, create new revenue streams, enhance customer loyalty, and position companies as leaders in responsible production.

Innovation must reach across the value chain, from smart logistics that reduce carbon footprints and improve efficiency, to technology-enabled traceability meeting buyer demands for transparency, and collaborative platforms for sharing resources and developing sector-wide solutions. By fostering a culture of innovation, companies can quickly adapt to changing conditions and capitalise on new market opportunities emerging from the global shift towards sustainability.

Cost savings, business resilience, and seizing opportunities

Integrating sustainability into core business processes can yield significant cost savings, drive operational efficiencies, and build the resilience required to weather both expected and unforeseen challenges. Sustainable practices such as energy conservation, water management, and waste minimisation can directly lower operating costs, especially valuable in Sri Lanka, where utilities and resource prices are volatile and supply interruptions common. Proactive management of environmental and social risks prevents costly disruptions, safeguards reputations, and ensures continuity of supply to key markets. Companies with strong sustainability credentials are increasingly favoured by investors, lenders, and insurers, gaining access to more and cheaper capital.

Treating sustainability as a central business driver enables organisations to unlock new opportunities: entering new markets that reward sustainable practices, developing innovative products and services for climate adaptation or resource efficiency, partnering with international organisations or governments on sustainable development initiatives, and attracting and retaining top talent who seek purpose-driven employers. By seeing sustainability as a source of strategic advantage, companies can reveal opportunities that might otherwise remain hidden.

Open dialogue and collaboration: Overcoming challenges together

The scale and complexity of the sustainability challenge in Sri Lanka means that no single company or sector can tackle it alone. Open and honest discussions about barriers, failures, and lessons learned are essential for building collective resilience. Fostering industry and cross-sector collaboration can take many forms, including industry associations, public-private partnerships, knowledge-sharing platforms, and informal networks among peers. What matters most is the willingness to be transparent about challenges and to collaborate in developing solutions that benefit the entire ecosystem. This openness not only accelerates progress but also strengthens trust between companies, regulators, and the public, laying the groundwork for more ambitious, system-level change.

The role of the sustainability professional

As Sri Lankan corporates move from compliance to integration, the role of the sustainability professional becomes pivotal. These leaders are not simply report writers or compliance officers; they are strategic navigators who connect global expectations with local realities. Positioned effectively, they help align sustainability with business purpose, guide innovation to reduce environmental and social impacts, and act as trusted bridges between diverse stakeholders such as employees, investors, customers, and regulators. By embedding accountability into governance and ensuring that progress is measured by outcomes rather than activities, sustainability professionals elevate organisations from reactive box-ticking to proactive, purpose-led growth. For Sri Lanka, their expertise is essential in turning vulnerability into resilience and compliance into competitive advantage.

Towards true organisational sustainability

Sri Lankan corporates are at a defining moment. The journey towards sustainability begins with compliance, using IFRS S1 and S2 as mileposts, but must not end there. The true imperative is to embed sustainability into organisational purpose, governance, accountability, and business integration, ensuring that the organisation itself is future-proofed through robust assurance and a relentless commitment to eliminating greenwashing and greenhushing.

It calls for upskilling leaders, fostering innovation, embracing circularity, and cultivating a spirit of collaboration, even among traditional competitors. Companies must be courageous in addressing their challenges, nurturing partnerships, and building sector-wide solutions. Sri Lanka’s unique vulnerability to climate and labour risks makes this agenda urgent and non-negotiable.

The amendments to Sri Lanka’s Children and Young Persons Ordinance (CYPO) and the push for a new comprehensive ‘Compact Act’ are being hailed as long-overdue reforms, aligning the nation with international child rights conventions. Yet, beneath the veneer of progress lies a profound anxiety: will these rights-centric laws, particularly the outright ban on corporal punishment and the shift toward rehabilitation, inadvertently dismantle the traditional mechanisms of discipline that underpin Sri Lankan society?

A growing chorus of critics-from concerned parents and overburdened teachers to social conservatives-argues that these reforms are being enacted without adequate preparation, threatening to unleash a wave of juvenile indiscipline that the State is ill-equipped to manage.

The discipline deficit: When the rod is spared

The most immediate and controversial change is the explicit repeal of the section of the CYPO that permitted the use of corporal punishment by parents and teachers. For generations in Sri Lanka, as in many South Asian nations, the principle of ‘spare the rod, spoil the child’ has been central to moral and academic instruction. Discipline, enforced through firm action, was seen not as abuse, but as a form of moral care (‘metta’ in Buddhist thought).

The negative ramification, according to sceptics, is the creation of a ‘license for indiscipline.’

Erosion of authority: The ban immediately undermines the authority of teachers and parents, replacing traditional respect with what is perceived as a permissive legal framework. Teachers already report feeling powerless against defiant students, with the law stripping away their only effective sanction in large, under-resourced classrooms.

Creating a culture of impunity: By raising the age of protection to 18 and emphasising rehabilitation over punitive justice, the law risks being interpreted by adolescents as a shield against consequences. In a society grappling with rising youth crime, critics fear the shift from punishment to ‘restorative justice’ will simply be seen as a slap on the wrist.

The ‘Western Model’ mismatch: While developed nations like the UK phased out corporal punishment over decades alongside massive investments in social workers, counsellors, and specialised educational psychologists, Sri Lanka’s adoption of the standard is instantaneous. The result is a Western legal standard layered onto an Eastern cultural reality, creating a vacuum where traditional controls have been removed, but modern support systems are non-existent.

The flip side: Excessive punishments and the impact on children and adolescents

Proponents of this piece of legislation and those initiators in the NPP Government argue that long enough have we had archaic child rights statutes and we must move with times and in tandem with ‘developed’ societies. Definition of development apart it is a fact that there have been and continue to be excessive punishment of children in schools, public humiliation and abuse Not only in schools but at home fronts as well. This requires stringent preventive laws and deterrent punishments. However are we jumping into a fire from a frying pan? Are we being too liberal?

Readiness: Are parents and teachers equipped?

The efficacy of the new laws hinges entirely on the readiness of the two most crucial groups: parents and teachers. Current data suggests they are dangerously unprepared for the cultural revolution mandated by the legislature.

Parental confusion and anxiety

For the average Sri Lankan parent, the sudden prohibition of physical discipline causes immense confusion. There has been a clear failure by the state to launch comprehensive, nationwide public education campaigns to teach alternative, positive parenting skills.

Instead of being empowered, many parents now face a triple dilemma:

1.Legal fear: Fear of being reported and prosecuted for disciplinary actions traditionally considered normal.

2.Disciplinary void: Lacking the skills to manage severe behavioural issues without firm measures.

3.Moral anxiety: Concern that their children will grow up lacking the discipline and obedience necessary to succeed in a highly competitive society.

The teacher’s dilemma in schools

The burden of maintaining order in overcrowded public schools falls squarely on teachers, who are already stretched thin due to administrative loads and insufficient resources. Research indicates that many teachers view the ‘form and severity’ of corporal punishment as the issue, not the act itself, suggesting a fundamental disconnect with the legislative intent.

Teachers argue that without the fear of sanction, student defiance will surge, leading to:

Deterioration of educational quality: More class time spent managing disorder rather than teaching the curriculum.

Stress and burnout: Increased psychological stress on teachers who feel their authority is constantly being tested and their professional judgment second-guessed by students and authorities.

Lack of alternatives: The promised investment in school counsellors, specialised training in positive reinforcement, and behavioural management teams remains largely unfulfilled, leaving educators with no tools to replace the discarded ‘rod.’

Resource shortfall: The ultimate policy failure

Beyond cultural resistance, the proposed reforms suffer from a crippling resource deficiency. Moving the juvenile justice system from a punitive model to a rehabilitative one is extraordinarily expensive.

The new law promises that minors will be placed in specialised institutions focusing on rehabilitation. However, Sri Lanka currently lacks the required specialised facilities, trained social workers, and psychological experts to handle the influx of 16-to-18-year-olds removed from the adult prison system. The practical risk is that these young people may simply be shuffled into understaffed, ill-equipped remand homes, or worse, released into communities without necessary support, creating a public safety risk.

This failure to provide the social scaffolding necessary for the law to succeed makes the entire exercise vulnerable to criticism that it prioritises international optics over domestic reality.

Credibility: A child rights compact or a political gimmick?

Given the immense challenges, the critical question remains: is the push for this rapid, sweeping child rights reform driven by genuine national interest, or is it a calculated political manoeuvre?

While child protection activists have long championed these changes, the timing-often coinciding with governments seeking international legitimacy, as evidenced by the IMF push-invites scepticism. The NPP (National People’s Power) or any incumbent government, stands to gain significant political capital from championing a popular, internationally supported human rights agenda.

The most cynical interpretation suggests this is a calculated political gimmick designed for future electoral benefit. The children currently being empowered by this legislation will be the voting block of tomorrow. By positioning themselves as the saviours of child rights, the current political establishment is potentially cultivating the loyalty of a new generation of voters who will hold a favourable view of the party that abolished corporal punishment and granted them greater autonomy.

If the ‘Compact Act’ is enacted but fails to receive the necessary funding for implementation-if teachers remain unsupported, and rehabilitation centres remain empty promises-it will confirm that the reform was less about securing the child’s future and more about securing the politician’s vote. The true measure of the Government’s sincerity will not be the law passed in Parliament, but the Budget allocated to the child protection and social welfare departments in the years to come.

Sri Lanka’s economy is expected to grow by 4.6% in 2025, supported by a modest rebound in industry and steady growth in services, before slowing to 3.5% in 2026, according to the World Bank’s latest Sri Lanka Development Update titled ‘Better Spending for All’.

The report, launched yesterday in Colombo, warns that the recovery remains fragile and heavily dependent on the country’s ability to implement deep and sustained reforms.

Speaking at the launch, World Bank Country Manager for Sri Lanka and the Maldives Gevorg Sargsyan said the country’s economy had shown encouraging signs of recovery in the first half of 2025, growing by around 5% as industrial activity rebounded and services expanded.

‘We have seen people spending and investing more, inflation returning to low and stable levels, and businesses benefiting from easier access to credit,’ he said speaking via video conference from Washington D.C. where he is attending the IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings also attended by senior Sri Lankan officials.

He noted that Government finances had improved with stronger revenue collection, a smaller deficit, and stable foreign reserves, reflecting ‘the determination and effort of the Sri Lankan Government and people from all walks of life.’

However, he cautioned that the journey was far from over. ‘The economy is still not back to where it was in 2018, and while poverty is expected to fall this year, it is still twice as high as it was before the crisis in 2019,’ he said.

Sargsyan said that about 22% of the population still lives below the poverty line and another 10% remains just above it. Malnutrition remains a serious concern, while the job market is recovering too slowly, with wages and employment rates still at pre-crisis levels.

Looking ahead, the World Bank said that growth will likely remain modest unless Sri Lanka moves quickly to implement strong and urgent reforms.

‘Without these reforms, growth will likely come from people’s spending rather than from new investments and exports. Without these reforms, progress could even stall, and the benefits of recovery may not reach everyone,’ Sargsyan said.

He identified four key areas for reform: trade, investment, taxation, and job creation. ‘Sri Lanka needs to keep policies stable and consistent, and move quickly to remove barriers to trade, improve the investment climate, modernise the tax system, and make it easier for businesses to grow and create jobs,’ he said.

Sargsyan stressed that private sector-led growth was the only viable path for the time being. ‘Currently, in Sri Lanka, there is no fiscal space in the public sector. The Government doesn’t have the opportunity to use its own investments to facilitate growth,’ he said.

‘Hence, private sector-led growth is the only viable option for Sri Lanka for the time being.’

He also highlighted inefficiencies in public spending, noting that around 80% of Government expenditure is allocated to public sector salaries, welfare programs, and interest payments.

‘While there is limited room to drastically increase or cut overall public expenditure, there is significant potential to improve the efficiency and impact of existing spending,’ he said.

Sargsyan said that smarter spending could create fiscal space for growth-enhancing investment in infrastructure, education, and health. ‘Public investment and public sector wages reform can ensure that every rupee of public money is spent well and delivers more for the people,’ he said.

He welcomed the establishment of a new public investment program system to serve as a unified pipeline for Government projects, calling it ‘one of the key building blocks’ for more effective spending.

‘Sri Lanka has made real progress, but there is still much to do,’ Sargsyan noted.

‘The recovery is fragile, and many vulnerable citizens have not yet felt its benefits. By focusing on smarter spending, meaningful reforms, and inclusive growth, Sri Lankans can look forward to a stronger, more resilient recovery. And we, the World Bank Group, stand ready to support Sri Lanka in this journey,’ he said.

World Bank Country Economist for Sri Lanka Shruti Lakhtakia said the economy’s recovery had continued for a second year, with growth of 4.8% in the first half of 2025 driven primarily by household consumption. ‘High-frequency indicators such as cement consumption show improvement, a good sign for industry, but activity remains below pre-crisis levels,’ she said. Inflation turned positive after months of deflation, allowing the Central Bank to cut rates and fuel private credit growth, which reached nearly 20% in July.

She said Sri Lanka’s external balances had held up due to tourism and remittances, even as the trade deficit widened. ‘The current account has remained in surplus this year, but reserve accumulation has slowed, and the rupee has depreciated,’ she said.

Fiscal buffers have strengthened because of higher import tax revenues and lower capital spending, though under-execution of the capital budget was a concern. ‘We project a primary surplus above the Government’s 2.3% of GDP target, but this has come partly from reduced capital investment,’ she said.

Lakhtakia said poverty had begun to decline, but vulnerability remained high. ‘We expect around 22.5% of the population to be below the poverty line this year and another 10% just above it,’ she said.

‘Continuous food price increases have contributed to food insecurity and worsening child malnutrition, with more underweight and stunted children under five.’ The labour market, she said, was improving but had not yet reached pre-crisis levels in either participation or real wages.

Looking ahead, Lakhtakia said the outlook for 2025 was positive, with strong growth projected, but the path was narrow and dependent on policy consistency. ‘We expect the current account surplus to persist, supported by tourism and remittances, though merchandise exports may be affected by new tariffs,’ she said.

‘The key is to maintain reform momentum in trade, fiscal policy, and public spending.’

Lakhtakia, presenting findings from the World Bank’s Public Finance Review published in September, said spending reform was a core priority. ‘Sri Lanka’s total Government spending is low compared to peers, but 80% of it is rigid, locked in salaries, transfers, and interest payments,’ she said.

The public wage bill as a share of GDP is relatively small, but the headcount is high, resulting in lower average wages and inequities across the public sector. ‘If we include SOEs and Government-funded institutions, public employment would be about 3% higher than reported,’ she said.

She recommended preserving frontline workers in health and education to protect service delivery, while allowing natural attrition in overstaffed sectors.

‘A comprehensive review of base pay versus allowances could help systematise the wage structure,’ she said. She also called for modernising the payroll system to increase transparency and efficiency.

On public investment, Lakhtakia said Sri Lanka’s stock of public assets was low and declining, with investment concentrated in sectors like transport.

‘It is critical to improve the link between capital spending and infrastructure needs, complete projects more quickly, and maintain assets to extend their life,’ she said.

She added that the new public investment management system should streamline project planning, screening, approval, and monitoring, supported by better data to prioritise spending.

Lakhtakia said maintenance spending had risen recently, which was a positive sign, and encouraged the Government to continue this trend to maximise the lifespan of assets.

‘Better targeting, reallocation of resources to high-impact projects, and stronger implementation through the Public Financial Management Act will be key,’ she said.

The World Bank economists concluded that while Sri Lanka had made significant progress in stabilising its economy, sustaining growth and reducing poverty would depend on reforms that promote competitiveness, attract private investment, and make public spending more equitable and effective.