CONTENTS OF
THIS SECTION
Last updated
01/09/07

"In my view, this design if adopted far from being a symbol of national unity will be symbol of our disunity."  Senator Nadesan, Dissent, Parliamentary Select Committee Report, 1951

---

The first House of Representatives of Ceylon (as it was then known) under the new Soulbury Constitution was elected in August 1947. The first Prime Minister was D.S.Senanayake who headed the Sinhala dominated United National Party. In anticipation of independence which was to be declared on 4 February 1948, a motion was tabled in January 1948 calling for the adoption of Lion Flag of the last Sinhala King of Kandy, Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe as the National Flag.

The motion was moved by  Mudaliyar A. L. Sinnelebbe, the Muslim Member of Parliament for Batticaloa and stated

"This house is of the opinion that the Royal Standard of King Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe depicting a yellow lion passant holding a sword in its right paw on a red background, which was removed to England after the convention of 1815, be once again adopted as the official flag of free Lanka."

The Sinhala Lion flag not find acceptance amongst the Tamil people and Senator Nadesan moved a motion in the Senate on 19 January 1948 in the following terms -

“That this House is of opinion that the National Flag of Sir Lanka should be designed so as to be acceptable to all sections of the people, and to be in keeping with the ideals of the present age”. 

 Nonetheless, the Sinhala Lion Flag was used as the National Flag on Independence Day on 4 February 1948 and on the occasion of the opening of the first Parliament of independent Ceylon on February 19th, 1948. Prime Minister D.S. Senanayake unfurled the Lion Flag at the Octagon (Pattirippuwa) during the independence celebration held in Kandy on February 12th, 1948.

Later on 6 March 1948,  a Parliamentary Select Committee was appointed by Prime Minister D.S.Senanayake for the design of the Flag. The Members of the Committee were Mr.S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, Sir John Kotelawala, Mr. J.R. Jayewardene, Mr. T.B. Jayah, Dr. L.A. Rajapakse, Mr. G.G. Ponnambalam and Senator S. Nadesan. The first three were future Prime Ministers of Sri Lanka.

The Select Committee submitted its Report on 14 February 1950 and recommended by a majority that the Lion Flag be kept intact, together with its border and Bo leaves in the four corners - and to this Lion Flag (and outside it) two strips, one green and the other yellow be added. Each of these equal to one seventh the size of the flag were to represent the two minorities, the Tamils and Muslims.The National Flag recommended by a majority of the Select Committee was later presented to Parliament by Prime Minister D.S. Senanayake and adopted.

The decision to retain the Lion Flag in its entirety and keep the strips representing the minorities 'outside' its borders was symbolic of the will of Sinhala majority to build the newly independent state on the narrow and divisive foundation of the old Kandyan Sinhala kingdom.

Senator S.Nadesan, an Independent Tamil Senator, dissented from the majority view. In his dissent dated 15 February 1950,  he said:

"I regret that I am unable to agree with the majority decision of the National Flag Committee. In my view a national flag apart from giving an honoured place to all communities, must also be a symbol of national unity. From the point of view of giving an honoured place to all communities irrespective of their numerical strength, I would have preferred a Tricolour of yellow, red and white or of saffron, red and green. But as objection was taken to a Tricolour by several members of the Committee on the ground that the Lion Emblem will be considerably reduced in size and that it will not be acceptable to majority community, this proposal had to be abandoned.

The only line of approach which appeared to promise a solution acceptable to all the members of the Committee was a consideration of various modifications of the Lion Flag and during the last two years the committee has been addressing itself to this task and I shared the regret of other members of the Committee when at one stage it was found even necessary to consider reporting to the Prime Minister that we were unable to suggest a solution on account of there being a complete lack of unanimity.

The meeting of the 13th instant was held for the purpose of considering the draft report informing the Prime Minister that we were unable to agree. However, on the 11th instant I learnt that the Flag question had been settled through negotiations which had taken place outside and that it was agreed that two strips of saffron and green should be added to the Lion Flag in the proportion of 1:1:5. At the meeting itself, Mr.Ponnambalam made what he called a last minute appeal to the members to accept a flag in the proportions suggested by him, and the other members readily agreed to the proposal.

I stated to the members of the committee my reasons for dissenting and it is a matter of sincere regret to me that I was unable to convince them of the correctness of my view. However, as it was necessary in a matter of such importance, particularly when all other members of the committee had agreed to the design, that I too should consider the matter carefully, and if possible agree with the rest of the committee, I asked for further time to consider in all its aspects and the committee was good enough to give me further time.

I have since examined the position carefully and I feel that I cannot subscribe to the design that has been adopted by the rest of the committee. In my view this design if adopted far from being a symbol of national unity will be a symbol of our disunity.

Once the committee agreed that the national flag should be devised by modifying the Lion Flag, one would have thought that any strips adopted for the purpose of satisfying the minorities will be integrated with the Lion Flag and that these strips will not be an appendage to the Lion Flag. Anyone looking at the proposed Flag will see the Lion Flag is preserved in all its integrity and outside that Flag, two strips are allotted to represent the minorities.

As the Lion Flag has been used a distinctive flag, anyone viewing the design that has been agreed to by the rest of the committee cannot be blamed if he thinks that the minorities are given a place outside the Lion Flag. The minorities themselves will feel that they have been given a subordinate position in the flag. Besides the yellow border which runs round the Lion Flag effectively separates the two strips that have been devised to satisfy the sentiments of the minorities thereby effectively creating a division in the flag itself - a division which we are endeavouring, I hope, to eradicate in our national life. After all a flag is a symbol and the symbol must at least effectively show the unity and strength of the nation.

Accordingly I suggested to the committee the minimum modification which while not disturbing the proportions of the strips which had been agreed to by the members will ensure the incorporation of the saffron and green strips in the Lion Flag, so that the flag may embody the ideal of national unity which I consider most important in the conception of a national flag. The suggestion that I made was that the yellow border which according to the proposed flag separates the saffron strip from the red strip should be completely eliminated. In the result the flag would have been comprised of green, saffron and red strips in the proportion of 1:1:5 with the Lion on the red strip with the yellow border surrounding the entirety of the flag and encompassing the two strips. This would have meant only the sacrifice of a yellow border from one side of the Lion Flag to enable the saffron and green strips to be closely integrated with the Lion Flag. This I thought was the barest minimum concession that should have been made to minority sentiment if one desired a national flag which would symbolise the ideal of unity.

It is hardly necessary for me to refer to other countries like Great Britain where national flags have been designed not by superficially adding a strip to another flag and outside it, but by making the strips part and parcel of the flag. In our national life we do not want to create water tight compartments. Neither do we desire that one community should be segregated from another. Why then do we want to segregate the saffron and green strips which are provided to satisfy minority sentiments outside the borders of the Lion Flag? In my view, the suggestion that I have made does not entail the sacrifice of any vital part of the Lion Flag and thus cannot offend Sinhalese sentiments. At the same time it provides a method of evolving a flag which may be called 'national'."  [Report of the National Flag Committee, Parliamentary Series (House of Representatives) Fourth Session of the First Parliament, No.5 - Tabled in the House of Representatives on 27 February 1951]

How national is our National Flag?  C. V. Vivekananthan
Sunday Times - February 2, 2003

The 'Lion Flag' of the last King of Kandy, was hauled down when the Kandyan Convention was signed on March 2, 1815. Though it was buried in the sand of history, E. W. Perera discovered the banner at the Chelsea Hospital and made reference to it in his book on 'Sinhalese Banners and Standards'.

J. R. Jayewardene was the first to proclaim the use of the Lion Flag as the national flag of Ceylon. Addressing the State Council in September 1945. He said 'It is the flag that held sway over three portions of Lanka - Ruhuna, Rajarata and Mayarata. It is a yellow flag with a lion in the centre'.

JR drafted a motion and with his machiavellian tactics persuaded Batticaloa MP A. Sinnalebbe to present it in the House of Representatives on January 16, 1948. It read: "That this House is of opinion that the Royal Standard of King Sri Wickrama Raja Sinha depicting a yellow lion passant holding a sword in its right paw on a red background, which was removed to England after the Convention of 1815, should once again be adopted as the official flag of Free Lanka".

Prime Minister D. S. Senanayake: "It is a well known fact this flag happens to be the flag of the last King of Kandy, and we all know that the last King of Kandy was a Tamil. When we lost our country, when the people chose the King of England as their Sovereign, this was the flag of the last Kandyan King who was dethroned, that was pulled down. Now that England is transferring sovereignty to the people of this Island, I want England also to replace that flag along with the sovereignty that they are giving us back. It is for this main reason that we intend hoisting this flag on Independence Day.

"It was really a surprise to me to find my good friend, the Muslim Member, trying to show that we want to impose something on them. All that we want them to realize is that when Ceylon lost its sovereignty, it lost its flag, and that when the people are to regain sovereignty, that flag must be hoisted. During the time of Sri Wickrama Raja Sinha there were Tamils, Sinhalese and Muslims living in the Kandyan Provinces and they all lived as one people. It is true that the low-country lost its sovereignty long before that: it is true that Jaffna lost its sovereignty long before that: the Kandyans lost their sovereignty last. But when the people who graciously give us back our freedom are the people, who are giving us the flag, let us have it and not the flag of some other people who conquered us before them".

National Flag Committee

On February 12, 1948 the Lion Flag that was hoisted by the Prime Minister in the presence of the Duke of Gloucester was identical with the one hauled down at the same spot on March 2, 1815.

On March 6, 1948 the Prime Minister appointed a committee headed by S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike and including Sir John Kotelawala, J. R. Jayewardene, T. B. Jayah, Dr. L. A. Rajapakse, G. Ponnambalam, and Senator S. Nadesan to advise him on the question of National Flag.

The committee called for the views of the public. Their general consensus was that the Lion Flag should be the National Flag with suitable modifications made therein.

GG’s compromise formula

The committee had deliberations for about two years. Yet it could not achieve unanimity. It wanted to report the deadlock to the Prime Minister. However, Ponnambalam who came down to 'responsive co-operation' after his famous 'fifty fifty' demand by joining the Government of Senanayake in August 1948 as Minister of Industries, Industrial Research and Fisheries, proposed a compromise formula which said that two strips of saffron and green should be adopted to the Lion Flag in the proportion of 1:1:5. All the members except Nadeson accepted the formula.Thus on February 13, 1950 the committee approved the Lion Flag incorporating modifications suggested by GG.

Nadesan's report

In the context of the present political turmoil in our country, the dissenting Report by Nadesan becomes an essential reading.

Senator Nadesan never indulged in communal politics. His views are pregnant with cogent and valid reasons for the establishment of national unity.

He said in his dissenting report that "a national flag, apart from giving an honoured place to all communities in the flag, must be a symbol of national unity.

"In my view, this design if adopted far from being a symbol of national unity will be symbol of our disunity. Once the committee agreed that the national flag should be devised by modifying the Lion Flag, one would have thought that any strips adopted for the purpose of satisfying the minorities will be integrated with the Lion Flag and that these strips will not be an appendage to the Lion Flag. Anyone looking at the proposed flag will see that the Lion Flag is preserved in all its integrity and outside that Flag two strips are allotted to represent the minorities. After all a flag is a symbol and the symbol must at least effectively show the unity and strength of the nation".

He recommended the elimination of the yellow border which according to the proposed flag separated the saffron and green strips from the red strip. Then, the flag would comprise green, saffron and red strips in the proportion of 1:1:5 with the Lion on the red strip and 'with the yellow border surrounding the entirety of the flag and encompassing the two strips within the yellow border'.

This could be the barest minimum concession that would have been made to minority sentiment if one desired a national flag, which would symbolize the ideal of unity.

He referred to other countries where national flags have been designed not by superficially adding a strip to another flag outside the flag, but by making the strips part and parcel of the flag. He believed that his suggestion made no entailment to sacrifice any of the vital part of the Lion Flag and could not offend Sinhalese sentiments. It would only provide a method of evolving a flag, which may be called 'national' by all the inhabitants of Sri Lanka for all times.

He posed a question in his report: "Why then do we want to segregate the saffron and green strips, which are provided to satisfy minority sentiments outside the borders of the Lion Flag?

A reference to the National Flag has, for the first time, been made in the Constitution of 1978. Article 6 states "the National Flag of the Republic of Sri Lanka shall be the Lion Flag depicted in the Second Schedule".

Constitution

The National Flag in the Second Schedule to the Constitution has four bo-leaves in the four corners of the red background of the Lion Flag. The four bo-leaves were not in the Original Design of the Flag, marked Plate XV and signed by all the members except Nadesan. The majority of the members of the National Flag Committee had recommended that the flag upon meticulous examination of the public views and study by themselves of the various aspects and issues involved therein. Notwithstanding the acceptance of the flag by the Committee JR made the change without a word of general discussion or deliberation at the Constituent Assembly.

The Lion Flag has acquired historical recognition as a national emblem. It is nothing but right that every one irrespective of ethnic feeling should feel proud of it. Bo-leaves indicate that Sri Lanka is a Buddhist country. No reasonable person would object to such a perception. But JR who frequently spoke of embracing the minority, felt reticent to correct the Flag as suggested by Senator Nadesan in his dissenting report. As in the manner he brought the bo-leaves into the Flag he could have integrated the saffron and green strips with the lion. JR could have brought about a national unity by removing the yellow strip that lays between the Lion, which indicates the Sinhalese and the saffron and green strips, indicating the minorities in the Flag. He did not do it.

It is unfortunate that the leaders of the majority fail to appreciate that when the Lion Flag was used as a distinctive flag, anyone looking at it would think that the minorities are given a place outside the Lion Flag and they have been given a subordinate position in the flag. The yellow border that runs round the Lion Flag effectively separates the two strips denoting to satisfy the sentiments of the minorities.

Separation of it promotes an effective division in the National Flag itself. It is the division that all right thinking people of this country want to eradicate from our national life.

Will there ever be enough courage and wisdom among the leaders of the majority to rectify the National Flag on the lines of thinking of Senator Nadesan? Will they make Sri Lanka an Asian Switzerland?

Sri Lanka's national flag is steeped in history and tradition. From its hoary past to the present day, the events linked with this national symbol of freedom and independence are so packed with drama, suspense, and political intrigue that it could easily go down in history as one of the most unique flags in the world.

Much of these fascinating and exciting events has however been forgotten in the mists of time, and many of our younger generation are unaware of the significance and importance of their National flag.

Many may not know that the birth of the Sinhala race began with the planting of the Lion flag for the first time in Lankan history. Here is how H.M. Herath describes this epoch making event in a recently published book on the National flag and National anthem of Sri Lanka.

He writes: "In about 486 BC, Prince Vijaya, the eldest son of Sinha Bahu, King of Sinhapura landed at Tammana with seven hundred companions from his father's kingdom in North India. So delighted was he, that he took a handful of sand and called it the land of the copper coloured sand, and planted the flag they were carrying (a flag with a lion symbol). He then kissed the sand and called it "Thambani." So began the history of Sri Lanka, the birth of the Sinhala race."

If history had not yet begun to be written in Sri Lanka, how do we know about this event? Replies the author, "The inscription of this great and grand event on record is among the archaeological remains at the Sanchi stupa, an ancient Buddhist monument built during the reign of Emperor Asoka in the second century BC in the native state of Bhopal in India."

Since its arrival in Sri Lanka, the Lion flag has played a significant role in the political history of the country. To our monarchs of yesteryear it became a symbol of freedom and Hope. The warrior King Dutugemunu, used the heraldic lion carrying a sword on his right forepaw with two other symbols, the Sun and the Moon on his banner.

An illustration in the frescoes of the rock temple at Dambulla which traces the beginning of the Lion flag of Sri Lanka shows the victorious king proudly carrying his royal banner depicting the Lion symbol after he freed his people from foreign invaders.

As Herath points out, the lion symbol was used by the Lankan monarchs from the time of King Vijaya. This has been recorded in both the Mahavamsa and the Chulavamsa. The last king to use the flag as a symbol of national freedom was King Sri Vikrama Rajasinghe who was the last king of Sri Lanka, and whose rule ended in 1815.

Commenting on the significance of the emblems on the Royal Standard of Sri Vikrama Rajasinghe, Herath writes: "The heraldic Lion standing holding a sword upright by its right paw stands for Justice and Righteousness.

"Bordering this is a rectangular line with four Bo leaves at the four corners, symbolising Metta, Karuna, Muditha, Upeksha, called the 'Four Brahma-Viharana in Buddhist matbaphysics.

"The yellow border represents the Maha Singha who played an important role in guiding kings in ancient times and directed and participated in the emancipation of the country as recorded in the national chronicles." He adds, "All these emblems, on a brilliant background of crimson indicate immortality, and remained the Royal Standard of King Sri Vikrama Rajasinghe, the last king of Kandy."

The ceremony in which the flag was replaced by the British Union Jack was full of drama and colour. Describing it Herath writes: "The Kandyan Convention was proclaimed at 3.30 p.m. on March 2, 1815, in the Audience hall, then called the Magul Maduva of the Palace of Kandy.

This was signed by governor Robert Brownrigg on behalf of His Royal Highness, the Prince Regent, on the one hand, and the Adigars, Dissavas and other principal chiefs of the Kandyan Province. ...Outside, drums were beating all around the hall. British troops guarded all the entrances to it and also patrolled the streets. The treaty was next read aloud to the chiefs in Sinhala and both parties agreed to its contents.

Then the Lion flag was hauled down and the Union Jack took its place amidst salvoes of artillery and His Majesty King George III was acclaimed King of Ceylon."

But the act of hoisting the British flag in place of the Lion flag was premature, a violation of the law, as it was done before the last Kandyan chieftains had signed the treaty, and prompted retaliation from the Maha Sangha, a who were present on the occasion.

Herath re-enacts details of that suspenseful and dramatic epoch making event." " From amidst the spectators who watched this drama, stepped out a Buddhist monk, the Ven. Wariyapola Sumangala of the Asgiri fraternity. Fortified with confidence, fortitude, self-respect and patriotism he approached the English general to ask, "who gave you permission to hoist your flag here?

You have no right to do so - Yet." He then proceeded to pull down the Union Jack, trampled it and hoisted the Lion flag in its place. Only after chief Adigar Ehelepola had signed the Convention with much reluctance on March 10 that the Union Jack was hoisted."

Not many may know that the Royal standard of the last king of Lanka languished in a military hospital in London after the British took control of the Kandyan Kingdom.

According to Herath, it was removed to England by the British Raj and kept in the Royal Military Hospital Chelsea in London until a E. W. Perera, a staunch patriot also known as the Lion of Kotte, discovered it.

The first time the Lion flag became a centre piece of attraction and the public became aware of the actual design of the flag following the fall of the Kandyan Kingdom was when the Dinamina issued a special edition of the paper on March 2, 1915 to mark the centenary of the end of Sinhala independence, with the intention of re-kindling the desire of the people to win back the freedom they had lost to the British, Herath states. He adds, "On the front page were portraits of the last King and Queen of Kandy surmounted by the royal insignia Crown and the Lion flag in colour.

This was the first time since the fall of the Kandyan Kingdom that the people became aware of the actual pattern of their national flag."

Although the Ceylon Independence Act 1947 passed by the parliament of Britain stated that the flag of the British empire, the Union jack would continue to take precedence over the Lion flag, the national leaders of the time were openly opposed to such a decision.

Still, barely nineteen days prior to the dawn of Independence Day, Lanka's first Prime Minister Mr. D. S. Senanayake's cabinet had yet not taken a decision with regard to hoisting the National Flag on the first independence celebrations of February 4, 1948.

It was left to Mudaliyar A. L. Sinnelebbe, the Member of Parliament for Batticaloa to move a motion in parliament stating that, "This house is of the opinion that the Royal Standard of King Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe depicting a yellow lion passant holding a sword in its right paw on a red background, which was removed to England after the convention of 1815, be once again adopted as the official flag of free Lanka."

The flag was hoisted on that historic occasion amidst the joyous sound of temple bells, crackers and beating of tom toms by Lanka's first Prime Minister, and it occupied a pride of place when it replaced the Union jack at the Independence Square, Colombo on the occasion of the first session of Lanka's independent parliament which was opened by the Duke of Gloucester.

On March 6, the same year the Prime Minister appointed a seven member National flag Committee headed by the leader of the House Mr. S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike to advise him on the question of the National flag of Ceylon. After several sittings spread over two years, the committee gave its final recommendations on February 13, 1950.

"The Lion in gold on a crimson background has been retained. Four Bo leaves in gold have replaced the pinnacles at the four corners of the crimson background. Two vertical stripes of equal size in saffron and green represent the minority communities; the Muslims and the Tamils. The stripes in relation to the entire flag are in proportion 1:1:5.

A gold border runs around the flag." A detailed description of the emblems on the flag and their significance concludes this fascinating account of Lanka's national flag, followed by a short description of the origin and significance of the national anthem written by Ananda Samarakoon.