That’s a wrap. The Asia Parliamentary Dialogue 2026: Open Parliaments, Stronger Democracies, convened by @ManthriLK through @VeriteResearch has successfully concluded. Held on Friday, August 28th, across the region via Zoom. This initiative brought together a diverse assembly of parliamentary leaders, civil society advocates, and experts.   The dialogue delved into critical strategies for making legislatures more transparent, inclusive, and accountable. Insightful panels explored topics such as leveraging digital tools for better citizen engagement, strengthening legislative oversight,and fostering regional collaboration to uphold democratic principles. It was a timely and essential conversation.   Thank you to everyone who registered, attended, and contributed to these vital discussions. The journey towards stronger,more open democracies continues!    Watch this space for further updates and key takeaways. #SriLanka #AsiaParliamentaryDialogue

Limited slots available - register now! Join us for the Asia Parliamentary Dialogue 2026, convened by @VeriteResearch via @ManthriLK. Join parliamentarians, parliamentary officials, monitoring organisations, and civil society leaders across Asia. 📅 Date: Friday, 28 August 2026 🕙 Time: 10:00 AM – 1:00 PM (SLT) | 04:30 AM – 07:30 AM UTC 📍 Platform: Online (Zoom) Scan the QR code on the slides or register via the link below to secure your spot: forms.cloud.microsoft/Pages/…

For 65 years, #SriLanka has tried to solve human-elephant conflict by confining elephants inside Protected Areas. 70% of them live outside. In 2024, community-built fences cut elephant deaths by 20% and human deaths by 15%. In 2025, both rose again. by Research Fellow Dr. @KnightMalathy & Dr. Sumith Pilapitiya. Read: dailymirror.lk/opinion/Sri-L…

On 15 June, @FT_SriLanka carried our Op-ed The price is wrong, twice: Sri Lanka's fuel is both overpriced and underpriced, by Saliya Wickramasuriya, Dr. @NCdeMel , and @Im_Anushan . On 7 July, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation responded, calling parts of the Op-ed 'factually incorrect' and 'unsupported by evidence'. Following is our full reply, published in Daily FT today. We thank the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) for its response. Three brief observations are warranted. First, the only informational point the response presents as contradicting our Op-ed is that Government fuel subsidies and pricing decisions apply across all licenced fuel marketing companies, and not to CPC alone. But our Op-ed took exactly that point as given. The comparison with other market players rests on the premise that they operate under the same subsidies and the same prices as CPC. Any reading of the article that suggests otherwise would be a misreading. What warrants correcting, then, is the misreading — not our Op-ed as written. For how the Government subsidy is cleverly designed to be fiscally neutral, see the article “Fuel Price Shock Does Not Have to be Passed on Fully to Consumers: Why and How?” published in PublicFinance.LK. It is precisely because the central Government is providing this subsidy — effectively a refund of the excess tax collected due to price increases — that CPC has no grounds to claim the losses it claims from the sale of fuel. Second, the response claims that our Op-ed contains statements that are “factually incorrect” and “unsupported by evidence”. That claim falls on its own sword: the response offers no data or evidence whatsoever to substantiate it. The analysis in our Op-ed, by contrast, was built on CPC’s own published purchase prices, the Government’s published subsidy, and global market prices. We would have been glad to receive information — if any exists — that would change the analysis. Unfortunately, none has been provided. Third, the response lectures the media that material should not be “published without proper verification of the relevant data”, and that “information published on matters of national economic importance be based on verified facts and reliable evidence”. The irony is that this advice, if it had been applied, would have prevented the publication not of our Op-ed — which is anchored in published data — but of the response to it by CPC, which contains none. The question posed by our Op-ed therefore remains on the table, unanswered: why does the main State institution that supplies fuel in Sri Lanka pay more to purchase it than comparable suppliers, in Sri Lanka and in the rest of the world? Article links: Our op-ed: DailyFT, 15 June 26 ft.lk/ft_view__editorial/The… CPC's reply: DailyFT, 7 July 26 ft.lk/opinion/Right-of-Reply… Our response: DailyFT 10 July 26: ft.lk/opinion/Reply-to-the-C…