With the passing away of Deshamanya H. L. de Silva (H.L), his beloved country - Sri Lanka - has lost not only one of its foremost legal luminaries but also one of its most faithful sons whose unwavering devotion to his country was an inspiration to many. His peers recognised and accepted him as Sri Lanka’s foremost constitutional lawyer. But to thousands of others who could not assess the subtleties or the nuances of his legal arguments he was their legal Commander-in-Chief in the protection of Sri Lanka. Apart from the fact that he won all the landmark cases affecting Sri Lanka and its future, what impressed most of us and endeared us to him was his unstinting loyalty and commitment to his beloved country.

I first met him when he was Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN. We used to exchange some of our writings and whenever we met the conversation was about Sri Lanka and very little else. Our association developed further in Sri Lanka. Many tributes have been paid about his legal skills, but what impressed me was his ability to use his legal skills as a weapon in the defence of his beloved country. Whether it was challenging P-TOMS, or the merger of the Northern and Eastern Provinces, or any other issue relating to Sri Lanka he was called upon to defend, his paramount interest was that Sri Lanka should stay whole because he sincerely believed that any political arrangement that had the potential to threaten its wholeness was not a defensible proposition.

His defensive armour went beyond the realm of law in the halls of justice to a vast body of material pertaining to the science of politics. He dedicated himself to the task of studying and researching constitutions and political arrangements of other countries in order to counter claims of homeland, right of nationhood and self-determination. This effort was assisted by an array of books and journals he acquired, mostly during his regular visits to Australia where his two daughters and three grandchildren, who were his pride and joy, lived. Evidence of this collection was visible in any part of his residence at Alwis Place, Dehiwala. This source material served him well in the defense of his beloved country; a defense he committed to with the skill and dedication of a master craftsman.

His study and thinking was reflected in the writings and the many speeches since his involvement as a delegate to the Thimpu talks. The fact that his views on issues were not at times in keeping with those of the governments in power did not deter him. The need to speak and write in order to defend and protect Sri Lanka was more important to him than any perks he would receive by toeing the government line, as so often is the case. He saw devolution not as a power sharing arrangement, but as an arrangement that had the potential to threaten the territorial integrity of his beloved country. He used his legal skills backed up with the opinions expressed in the writings of others to oppose devolution as a concept, even though it was contrary to the thinking of the governments in power. This commitment to the country above his personal self set him apart.

A collection of a selected portion of his several writings and speeches finally appeared in book form, in 2008; a legacy he kept on postponing despite the gentle persuasion of his wife, Manel, and many others. This endeavour would never have materialised if not for the efforts of Prof. G.H. Pieris; a contribution generously acknowledged by H.L. in this book which he titled Sri Lanka - A Nation in Conflict.

At a personal level for me, it was a great privilege to have known him and spent many a morning or an afternoon talking and sometimes arguing about what was best for Sri Lanka. One recurring topic was whether the province or the district as the peripheral unit would best serve Sri Lanka’s interests. Another was the erosion of ethical standards pertaining to aspects of professional conduct and governance. These were causes of deep concern that with time, and as his illness progressed, depressed him.

During our last meeting which was a few weeks before I left for the US in mid March this year he asked me ‘who would be there to carry on when we are gone’. I assured him that Sri Lanka would be alright and that there was a future to look forward to, not with the intention so much of cheering him but because I too genuinely believed it. At this point in the conversation a couple who were close friends to H.L and Manel dropped in. My reasons for hope regarding Sri Lanka were endorsed by his friends. This cheered him very much. I attempted to see him again before my departure but sadly, he was not well enough to see me. I deeply regret that I was not able to pay my last respects to a valued and cherished friend.

I have lost more than a friend. I have lost connecting with someone with whom I could have a stimulating conversation on a broad range of issues, mostly connected with the future of Sri Lanka. In a lifetime one encounters few such people. H.L. was one of the few in mine. We will miss him, but to the country for which he had a deep and abiding devotion, his passing away is an irreparable loss.

Manel, his children and grand children can take comfort in the thought that their lives were enriched by his greatness and pride in his contribution to his beloved country.