The Hon. (Dr.) Hiniduma Sunil Senevi - Minister of Buddhasasana, Religious and Cultural Affairs

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, I am pleased to express some views while amending an important law. As someone who served 25 consecutive years as an academic in a state university, I also see this as both a privilege and a responsibility.

¶ 02 For decades this unreformed Act has enabled injustices and irregularities within universities. From experience I can say these amendments are influenced by what we have observed over time.

¶ 03 Listening to earlier contributions on university structures and mandates, I wish to frame this. A university has three principal domains: academic, non-academic, and student affairs. Within non-academic, there is general administration and academic administration. Posts like Senior Assistant Registrar are purely administrative. But Heads of Departments and Deans are academic-administrative posts.

¶ 04 The chief academic officer is the Vice-Chancellor, followed by Deans and Heads—today’s focal posts. There are also Directors and Coordinators. Through these amendments we are broadening democratic space in university governance. Sections 49 and 51 of the Universities Act are being amended because the lack of democratic space has created problems within academic institutions.

¶ 05 The Leader of the Opposition referred to Sir Ivor Jennings. The fortresses of academic freedom that Jennings envisioned have been eroded over time. This has happened due to the politicization that is imposed to suit narrow interests—something universities still suffer from. These amendments rationally address that: appointments of Heads and Deans will be depoliticized, opportunities widened and made fair. A fair process is crucial because an academic’s career trajectory is profoundly affected by having served as Head or Dean—often important for promotion to Professor.

¶ 06 Further, let me highlight what the two amendments do. Section 49 concerns Deans. Among Senior Professors, Professors, Associate Professors and Senior Lecturers (Grade I) of a Faculty, the Faculty Board will be empowered to select the Dean—this is fair. Also, granting the Council the power to remove a Dean before the expiry of term, for cause, is a democratic safeguard.

¶ 07 Some claimed VCs were appointed as political favours. In reality, there is a lengthy process pursuant to Council recommendations; it is not about distributing posts to friends. Introducing term limits for Deans is also fair. The absence of term limits has produced distortions—sometimes the same person holds Head or Dean posts for three, four consecutive terms, amounting to 10–12 years, generating unhealthy conditions.

¶ 08 Section 51 defines a clear procedure for appointing Heads of Departments to be followed by the Council. This is necessary because at present a VC may appoint Heads largely at his or her discretion; consultation is optional and often absent, resulting in appointees who simply comply with the VC rather than serve academic interests. These reforms restore collective governance by vesting appointment and removal in bodies like Faculty Boards and Councils, the supreme governing authorities in universities.

¶ 09 These posts influence recruitments, promotions, study leave, viva voce shortlisting, foreign scholarships, and disciplinary inquiries. Therefore, we must select Heads and Deans through clear, fair procedures.

¶ 10 Questions were raised about the Prime Minister’s policy paper and a “six per cent” figure. We have not played games here. There is no challenge to university autonomy in the Prime Minister’s document; we all stand for autonomy.

¶ 11 I also refer you to an excellent paper, “External Influences to the University Autonomy,” by the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Directors (CVCD). Former Registrar Nishshanka Warakawulla has described how external pressures affect administration—worth reading.

¶ 12 Finally, to the Opposition Leader’s invocation of Sir Ivor Jennings: please read “The Road to Peradeniya.” Jennings set standards. He once rejected an application to the Ceylon University stating, “You are not yet qualified—work harder and return.” Years later, as Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge, he accepted the same applicant—who was none other than his own daughter, Claire Jennings—after she fulfilled the standards. That was the standard Jennings set. Contrast that with a recent attempt—based on a Minister’s letter—to admit a student to Ruhuna University on two-year-old A/L results; the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations blocked it. That is how some of you who governed for years undermined autonomy. These amendments aim to end such dark chapters. Thank you for the time.