The issue of delisting several Russian universities took a new turn last week with the appointment of a five-member committee by Health Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi to probe the conduct of the medical profession regulator, the Sri Lanka Medical Council (SLMC). The probing of the Council, which was established in 1924 and is considered one of the oldest councils in the world, was described as a historical event by an SLMC medical expert who wished to remain anonymous. The SLMC was established by the Medical (Amendment) Act No. 40 of 1998, replacing the Ceylon Medical Council (CMC). The CMC was established by the Medical Council Ordinance No. 24 of 1924. The Council is a statutory body established for the purpose of protecting healthcare seekers by ensuring the maintenance of academic and professional standards, discipline, and ethical practice by health professionals who are registered with it. As presently constituted, the Council has representation from the medical faculties of state universities as well as professionals in the state and private sectors. The aforementioned SLMC medical expert told The Sunday Morning that in light of the new developments, council members decided to refrain from commenting on the issue and allow the committee appointed by the Ministry to probe SLMC’s conduct. He also stressed that proper procedures were followed by the Council and the decision taken by them could not be a “mistake” – this is contrary to SLMC Chairman Prof. Harendra De Silva’s statement during a recent interview with a local television channel. As was reported last week, in response to the Russian Embassy’s statement, the SLMC Chairman said the names of the three universities were cut from the Approved List on the SLMC website “before a final decision had been made by the Council”. Prof. De Silva further said there is a committee that examines the suitability of universities for Sri Lankan students and makes recommendations to the SLMC. He explained that the Council has to examine the recommendations and finally send them to the Minister, who has the last word on the matter. Concerns were raised over these new developments coming to light, while information on rifts among council members also surfaced last week. In the meantime, the Government Medical Officers’ Association (GMOA) too was vocal in its opinion on the conduct of the Council as well as several council members. Delisting the universities A decision to delist several Russian universities that were awarding scholarships to Sri Lanka since the 1960s was made at the SLMC annual general meeting (AGM) on 26 June 2020. Soon after the decision was made, vehement opposition was expressed by existing university students as well as past pupils, claiming the decision affected a number of Sri Lankan students currently studying in these universities. They alleged that as a result of the SLMC’s decision, the country was facing the risk of losing the scholarships issued to Sri Lanka by several Russian universities, while the only university the SLMC recognises doesn’t provide scholarships to Sri Lanka. Furthermore, the decision was also described as affecting the bilateral relations between the two countries. Since then, the Government, Health Ministry, and all relevant state authorities were urged to immediately take action against the decision. By this time, the SLMC was clear on their opinion that those who were not satisfied with the decision could appeal on the same, and if these universities were willing to upgrade the quality of their degree programmes offered, the SLMC would reconsider the decision. As learnt by The Sunday Morning, most of these students were awarded scholarships based on their performance at the Advanced Level (A/L) examination; the affected students are mainly those who obtained high marks. It was learnt that the rejected universities provided medical scholarships to Sri Lanka since the 1960s, while the Government of Russia has provided around 40 scholarships to Sri Lankan students so far this year, out of which five were medical scholarships. It was also learnt that the objective of awarding these scholarships is to provide good-quality doctors for Sri Lanka as a means of strengthening the bilateral relationship between Sri Lanka and Russia. Students concerned In a letter to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the affected students stressed that out of the applicants for the 2020 scholarships, five students who obtained the best results in the 2019 A/L examination were awarded scholarships. Accordingly, Sewmi Himaya Sammani (AAA), S.K. Induwara Mahim Samarawickrama (AAB), R.M.R.A.S. Ranasinghe (AAB), Rosary Suranthi Nirmani Jayakody (AAC), and T. Maneesha Sohani Pieris (AAB) were awarded scholarships from Peoples’ Friendship University, Tver State Medical University, Peoples’ Friendship University again, and Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, respectively. The students pointed out that while the SLMC rejected the universities that awarded scholarships to these students, several other countries recognise these universities, which have also been ranked amongst the top universities in the world. A decision was made at the AGM of the SLMC on 26 June 2020 to delist Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, formally known as Patrice Lumumba University; Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University; and Tver State Medical University that award full scholarships to Sri Lankan students. In a letter written to the SLMC on 20 August 2020, the Association of Sri Lankan Graduates from Socialist Countries (ASLGSC) stressed that it was unfair to reject the Russian universities. The letter listed four universities: Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Tver State Medical University, and Astrakhan State Medical University. In the letter, ASLGSC Secretary Dhammike Mendis stressed: “The unfair rejection of these universities caused hardship and injustice to the students currently studying in the said universities. “Most of these students have gone under the scholarship programme offered to Sri Lanka since the 1960s,” he stated. In the letter, the Secretary has also noted that the SLMC hadn’t given its reasons for delisting the universities, and requested the Council to give them reasons for such action. SLMC gives reasoning When The Sunday Morning contacted SLMC Registrar Dr. Anada Hapugoda the previous week, he stressed that the SLMC rejected seven universities out of 32 universities that applied to the Council. “This is not the end of the world. They can appeal. We have given the universities reasons for rejection. If they rectify (those areas) and give us good graduates, we will be able to recognise them. This is the usual process; if we’ve rejected one university because they’re not teaching forensics, they propose to us that they will establish a forensic unit and teach our students forensics,” Dr. Hapugoda noted. Explaining further, he noted that when it comes to medical education, Sri Lanka’s standards are quite different to other countries’ standards. He said that as most of these foreign graduates are placed generally at the bottom of the merit list and have to work in faraway places like in villages, where they will have to work alone, Sri Lanka’s standards need to be high. “Our standards are high. Therefore, we need good-quality doctors. The yardstick by which they are assessing quality is based on world rankings – this is based on certain other aspects which are not relevant to us. “If you take the world-renowned Oxford University, they have not applied (to us), and my gut feeling is they will not get our recognition because they don’t teach certain subjects we want – for example, subjects like community medicine and forensic medicine,” he claimed. “In England, legal medicine is handled by separate specialist doctors. In Sri Lanka, it’s not like that. If you go to Mullaitivu, that doctor must be capable of doing a post-mortem and submitting the documents to courts. “You can’t go by the argument of world rankings, and we’re not considering it. Our process is very scientific and transparent,” he explained. The Registrar also noted that whenever the Council comes across a problem with a university, they write to the university in order to discuss the same. “We are doing all this to safeguard our citizens,” he stated. “If we allow for low-quality graduates, our own poor people will suffer – not the rich; the rich can go to the best doctors. In the village, very poor farmers, carpenters, etc. contribute to our economy. On those grounds, we can’t compromise our standards,” he noted. He also alleged that the main objective of universities in different countries is to sell their degrees, and that is why the SLMC is concerned about standards. Five-member committee In such a backdrop, a five-member committee was appointed by Health Minister Wanniarachchi to probe the conduct of the SLMC. The five-member committee includes specialist Dr. Prof. Hemantha Perera, former Ragama Medical Faculty Dean Prof. Prashantha Wijesinghe, specialist Dr. Anula Wijesundera, specialist Dr. Maithri Chandraratne, and specialist Dr. Dharshana Sirisena. Commenting on the appointment of the committee, the Health Minister noted that the SLMC is an independent body established by a charter and its primary function is to maintain a quality medical service by protecting the rights of patients. Also, according to the Medical Ordinance, the final responsibility for the decisions of the SLMC is vested with the Minister of Health, she noted. In a statement issued last Wednesday (16), the Minister said the decision was taken after considering the number of complaints received from various quarters, on the conduct of the SLMC, with some parties calling for a restoration of its status as an independent body. Among the complaints is a series of incidents related to the controversial delisting of several internationally recognised foreign universities, delayed elections to fill vacant positions within the SLMC hierarchy, alleged registration of doctors who have not fulfilled the required minimum educational qualifications, the postponement of the ERPM (Examination for Registration to Practise Medicine) for students with foreign medical degrees, and the hearing of complaints within the SLMC, which are outside its scope and existing laws. Russian concerns Later, the Russian Embassy in Sri Lanka, in a statement, said the Russian Federation was “concerned about the decision to remove three prominent Russian state universities” from the SLMC’s Approved List. The press release said the delisting had taken place “without prior information, despite the fact that the SLMC held several meetings with the officials of these Russian universities who came down to Sri Lanka throughout the past years, and regular payments were made by the universities to maintain the membership”. The Embassy also stated in the press release that it hopes that the SLMC decision “does not influence the practice of providing Russian state scholarships to Sri Lankan citizens in the future, causing a loss of opportunities to young individuals to pursue their higher education free of charge in prominent Russian universities”. GMOA’s stance Meanwhile, the GMOA issued a Trade Union (TU) notice last week, instigating all-island TU action which is to be initiated during the week starting tomorrow (21) to protest the undue delay in fulfilling several demands made by the Association, including regulating the SLMC. In a letter written to Health Minister Wanniarachchi last Friday (11), GMOA Secretary Dr. Senal Fernando stressed that TU action would be launched against the undue delay in getting the final approval of Parliament to implement minimum standards in medical education, for not conducting elections to fill four vacant SLMC posts, for ending the appointments made by former Health Minister Dr. Rajitha Senaratne within the SLMC, for the continuation of irregular inquiries with malicious intentions against GMOA officials which were initiated during the period of former Minister Dr. Senaratne, and for the delay in approving the Grade MO (Medical Officer) retirement age extension amended via the respective cabinet paper. In the letter, the GMOA further requested the Ministry to take prompt action against the above-mentioned demands prior to the proposed TU action. “Their explanation to take such a decision at a crucial time was that there are insufficient accommodation spaces for the NEGC and that when members come from Colombo, they do not have lodging facilities at the club. Therefore, they wanted to go ahead with the construction.” Another member had then pointed out that such a construction cannot take place on land the club does not own outright, which is on leasehold without three committee members signing the lease agreement, to which the Treasurer had later nodded in agreement. Abeyewardene then revealed that after the lapse of a year, the minutes of the meeting were circulated for the next AGM. Since 25 May 2019 and 30 April 2020, there has not been any communication over the construction or the status of the conceptual plan. During the Covid-19 lockdown, the office bearers of the NEGC had circulated a newspaper advertisement stating that the terms of the office bearers were to be extended to 15 August 2020. “On 1 August, I was sent a WhatsApp message from the Vice President, indicating that the NEGC needed my proxy for the AGM on 15 August 2020. Over the next two days, I received the minutes for the previous year’s AGM that was held on 25 May 2019 and proxy through courier, which I opened and observed. It is only when there is an election of office bearers that I say I cannot attend or send anyone in my proxy to vote.” AGM 2020 Abeyewardene explained to The Sunday Morning that he could not go to Nuwara Eliya for two AGMs: In 2018, he had been after a heart surgery and had to rest, and 2019, following the Easter Sunday attacks, he had not been able to travel to Nuwara Eliya. “The AGM minutes should ideally have a record of the day’s proceedings and has to be proposed and seconded by two people who were physically present at the AGM. I was in no capacity to confirm the minutes as I did not attend the AGM in 2019.” Nevertheless, this year, Abeyewardene had made it to the AGM that was held on 15 August 2020 in the company of the President of the Royal Colombo Golf Club (RCGC). “I walked in 10 minutes after the proceedings had commenced – that was at 6.10 p.m. The agenda for the AGM was on display on a widescreen and the House had stopped at the confirmation of minutes for the AGM that was held in 2019. It was during this time that member of the NEGC and Attorney-at-Law Ranjan Gooneratne brought out the violation of Rule 2 (e) as the NEGC office bearers had gone ahead and started the construction of the 12 new rooms within the period of May 2019 and April 2020.” Abeyewardene also pointed out that the members were unaware of the capital expenditure incurred to acquire land to build the new rooms, and even in the 2019 Annual Report, the expenses had not been reflected on the main balance sheet but had been added as a footnote in small lettering. “They had also not circulated the Annual Report on print but had sent it to all the members on a compact disc (CD), which I did not access. Therefore, I demanded a print copy that was made available during the AGM, which one of the office bearers refused to share in order to purposely hide the fact that funds had been used without proper approvals to acquire land and build the facilities that were agreed on, for which a budget was not approved.” While only one member of the NEGC who resided in Nuwara Eliya was aware of the financial misappropriation that was taking place, that member had remained silent throughout the AGM. The member had been helpless as the other office bearers continued to violate the club’s constitution. Abeyewardene and a few other members of the NEGC have now sought legal counsel and filed cases with the CID, requesting to hold investigations and for a forensic audit over the club’s financial records for the year 2019-2020, during which time this misappropriation had taken place. Moreover, they have also requested to investigate the named office bearers who have spent millions of rupees from the club’s funds to make cash purchases and lease payments for assets that were illegally acquired during their time in office as well as for misleading the members to approve their plans and meeting minutes through proxy. Misunderstanding company by-laws Providing the right of reply, The Sunday Morning contacted one of the standing committee members, who under condition of anonymity, said: “The office bearers holding office for year 2019-2020 of the NEGC decided to go ahead with the construction of the 12 new rooms that would improve the accommodation facilities at the club in good faith. Abeyewardene’s unfounded allegation against us and him convincing certain members to side with him has given rise to unnecessary dispute among the club members.” The committee member said that Abeyewardene had no reason to complain to the Nuwara Eliya Police Station or to obtain a stay order against the committee from convening a SGM from the District Court, which also extended to stop the committee from functioning. “The stay order was taken to bar the committee from tabling the capital expenditure the NEGC has incurred, which was to be retrospectively approved. However, the judge had later declined to issue the stay order. We are yet to be served summons, should the case be heard. We are yet to see the judge’s orders, as he has gone ex parte requesting investigations over the reports and to obtain a court order.” At the time he noted that since the committee was not issued summons and the committee learned that the judge had declined to issue a stay order, the SGM is to convene on Saturday (yesterday, 19). The legal counsel for the committee has now advised the committee members to convene the SGM and also to proceed with tabling the capital expenditure that was incurred, which is to be retrospectively approved. The conceptual drawings of the plan and the projected expenditure had been presented at the 2018 AGM when the budget for the year was presented, and during that AGM, two other items were also included: The capital expenditure that would have to be incurred for the construction of the 12 new rooms and the capital expenditure for the sewage treatment plant that is to be installed at the premises. Then when the Notice for the 2019 AGM was circulated, there were 12 agenda items, out of which items 10 and 11 were capital expenditures for the construction of the 12 new rooms and the installation of a sewage treatment plant. While these agenda items were read out loud at the 2019 AGM on 25 May, one of the members stood up to say that it was an excellent idea as the addition of the new rooms was very much welcomed, and said that the committee will have to convene over a SGM to get the capital expenditure approved. However, since this was discussed at the AGM, it was noted that they did not see a need for them to come back for a SGM. The legal counsel had previously advised the office bearers that since an AGM supersedes a SGM, items that are to be discussed at a SGM can be presented at an AGM, so that the general membership is also aware. “We had received all the necessary approvals to continue the construction work form the Nuwara Eliya Municipality. The lease agreement on the land that we were to build the new rooms and the sewage treatment plant was expiring, so we had to renew the leasehold and start the construction in 2019.” As the time for the 2020 AGM arrived, which the NEGC had to delay due to the travel restrictions imposed due to the Covid-19 lockdown, the AGM was eventually held on 15 August 2020. When the minutes of the 2019 AGM were read out and the confirmation of the minutes was proposed, the issue was raised over the capital expenditure for the 12 new rooms that were constructed, which was passed without holding a SGM. Amidst objections, the matter had been taken up for discussion at the AGM and the AGM was adjourned, so that a SGM could be called to get the committee to convene and the budgets that were spent to be discussed. “At the time, it was the sensible thing to do as there was a bit of an agitation by a couple of members who thought the SGM was necessary. At that point, there was no legal counsel for the committee present, and the committee decided to put the decision to a vote, which was a mistake made on the officer bearers’ and the committee’s part.” After this, the AGM had been adjourned to schedule a SGM.