Inside the Allegations, the Editorial Storm, and the Questions Sri Lanka Cannot Ignore
(Lanka-e-News -21.Nov.2025, 9.45 PM) In Colombo’s tightly-knit media circles, few names carry the influence and reputation of Jamila Hussain, the long-serving Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Mirror, a newspaper often praised as the island’s “liberal conscience.” For years she has been held up as a symbol of journalistic independence — a figure who outlasted political storms, ownership battles, and pressure from governments both friendly and hostile.
Yet today, a very different conversation is rippling through the corridors of Sri Lanka’s press fraternity.
Multiple journalists, diplomats, and political insiders now allege that Hussain refused to publish an investigative article concerning former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s son, Namal Rajapaksa, and his UK law-degree saga — a long-discussed controversy involving questions about foreign academic performance, Sri Lankan regulatory waivers, and the opaque pathway he purportedly took into the country’s legal profession.
None of these allegations have been tested, proven, or adjudicated. Hussain herself has made no public comment. The Daily Mirror, too, has declined to offer clarification. Yet the rumours grow louder by the week.
This is a story about the questions being asked, the silence that followed, and the credibility crisis now looming over one of Sri Lanka’s most recognisable journalistic figures.
The controversy over Namal Rajapaksa’s UK law degree is not new. For years, questions have hovered around:
the class of the degree,
whether it met Sri Lankan Law College requirements,
whether any special exemptions were granted, and
whether political influence played a role in admissions or recognitions.
Sri Lanka’s legal community is no stranger to such debates. The Law College, long criticised for opaque admissions processes, has frequently been accused of offering special treatment to politically connected students. The allegation — repeated in political circles for more than a decade — is that Namal Rajapaksa secured a waiver or accommodation not typically available to ordinary applicants, and did so while his father held the most powerful office in the country.
Again, these remain allegations, never officially confirmed, publicly documented, or transparently explained.
But the issue regained momentum in early 2025, when a group of Colombo-based journalists reportedly prepared a fresh investigative article, drawing on archival documents, interviews with regulatory officials, and academic correspondences related to Namal’s overseas qualifications.
The piece, according to those familiar with it, was ready for publication.
It never appeared.
And that is where the storm truly began.
Several sources within the media industry now claim that Jamila Hussain personally decided not to run the investigative piece.
Some allege she cited “insufficient verification.”
Others say she feared “unnecessary legal exposure.”
And a few believe — or at least suggest — that political sensitivities played a defining role.
These are, of course, claims.
Unproven.
Unofficial.
But persistent.
Even veteran correspondents who have defended Hussain in the past admit privately that the newspaper’s silence “does not look good.”
One senior diplomat based in Colombo, speaking off the record, remarked:
“The question is not whether the allegations are true. The question is why the paper avoided the story. A liberal newspaper cannot simply sidestep a matter involving public qualification standards, political influence, and the integrity of the legal profession.”
The criticism is biting — and growing.
The refusal to publish the piece has sparked a wider conversation about editorial ethics.
Sri Lankan journalists are now asking:
Did the editor act independently, or under influence?
Was the decision based on legal caution or political pressure?
Has the Daily Mirror compromised its reputation for impartiality?
And most importantly: What does this mean for the public’s right to know?
The issue is not merely about one degree, one politician, or one editor.
It cuts to the core of Sri Lanka’s broader crisis of trust — in its institutions, its courts, its media, and its political elite.
If Sri Lanka’s most acclaimed liberal newspaper cannot freely publish an investigation into a powerful political figure, critics argue, then what hope is there for the rest of the media landscape?
Some critics have gone further, calling for scrutiny of Hussain’s background, wealth, and professional rise — questions often raised in Colombo’s cynical cocktail-circuit conversations but seldom written down.
Such inquiries are treacherous territory.
Ethnicity, family origin, and personal background should never become tools of political attack.
Yet critics — particularly among nationalist political factions — allege that Hussain’s “heritage,” as they coyly put it, influenced her editorial loyalties or vulnerabilities.
These insinuations are dangerous and inappropriate.
But they reveal the toxic climate surrounding the affair.
Once a journalist’s reputation is questioned, everything becomes fair game — especially in Sri Lanka’s highly tribal media and political environment.
In an unexpected twist, some voices within the political opposition and Governing party have now urged the Sri Lankan Inland Revenue Department to examine what they describe as Hussain’s “extravagant wealth.”
There is no publicly available evidence to suggest wrongdoing.
There is no document, no report, no formal complaint.
Yet the call for scrutiny reflects how deeply the controversy has politicised.
The absence of a simple explanation from the Daily Mirror has allowed speculation to flourish unchecked.
In the age of viral allegations and online outrage, silence is not neutrality — it is fuel.
Some staff at Vijaya Newspapers Ltd. — the publishing house behind the Daily Mirror — reportedly believe the episode has become an embarrassment for the organisation.
The Wijewardena family, long regarded as custodians of the liberal press tradition in Sri Lanka, now faces a difficult question:
One insider notes:
“The issue is not whether Jamila is loyal or disloyal.
The issue is credibility.
If the public believes the editor shields political elites, then the paper loses its soul.”
Replacing an editor is no trivial matter.
But neither is losing the trust of readers.
Perhaps the most consequential development is the sudden interest shown by segments of the legal establishment.
Several senior lawyers have privately expressed concern that if the allegations surrounding Namal Rajapaksa’s qualification pathway are credible, an inquiry may be necessary.
Some members of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) argue that the integrity of the profession demands clarity.
If — and only if — it is proven that any lawyer used political influence to enter the profession by circumventing qualification standards, the consequences could be severe:
disciplinary action,
removal from the roll of attorneys,
or even legal proceedings.
No formal inquiry has been launched.
No official complaint has been lodged.
But the fact that these conversations are happening at all reflects how sharply the issue has escalated.
Journalism does not guarantee truth.
It guarantees scrutiny.
When an editor declines to publish an investigation, the public is entitled to ask why — especially when the investigation concerns:
the son of a former President,
possible political influence in professional qualifications,
potential regulatory failures, and
the credibility of a major national institution.
The Daily Mirror is not just any paper.
It symbolises the promise of a freer, more open Sri Lanka — a promise forged in the darkest years of censorship and intimidation.
If that institution hesitates today, critics warn, the consequences ripple far beyond one story.
It is about the integrity of the press.
The accountability of political elites.
And the right of citizens to demand transparency from those who wield power.
Until she speaks publicly, the allegations — fair or unfair — will continue to shape the narrative.
She remains, at least officially, one of Sri Lanka’s most respected editors.
Her supporters insist she has been a consistent defender of press freedom.
Her critics argue this scandal has tarnished everything she built.
Both cannot be true.
And Sri Lanka now waits for clarity — clarity that only she or the Daily Mirror can provide.
For Namal, the resurfacing of old academic controversies is politically inconvenient, especially as he repositions himself for future leadership within the SLPP and beyond.
If the legal community demands an inquiry — as some now privately indicate — he will be forced to respond.
Silence is no longer an option.
Ultimately, this story is not about degrees, editors, or media families.
It is about the country’s struggle to rebuild public trust.
Sri Lankans already doubt the political class.
They doubt the judiciary.
They doubt regulators.
They doubt the media.
A newspaper killing a story — even if for legitimate reasons — feeds that distrust.
A politician with unanswered academic questions feeds it further.
And an editor who refuses to explain her decision becomes part of the story she tried to avoid.
Sri Lanka deserves answers — not rumours, not whispers, not silence.
Until those answers come, the questions will only grow louder.
-By Lanka-e-News Investigative Desk
---------------------------
by (2025-11-21 16:19:11)
Read 20898 Times
Leave a Reply
0 discussion on this news