by Our Political Affairs Editor
The monstrous spectacle that has recently unfolded in Sri Lanka’s tuition culture is not merely an aberration of individual pathology but a reflection of the perverted dynamics that have been allowed to fester in the educational sphere. The infamous tuition teacher at the centre of this scandal does not exist in a vacuum; rather, he is the symptom of a deeper malaise—a depraved symbiosis between unchecked power, cultural permissiveness, and an insidious social apathy toward the psychological and physical violation of children.
The videos that have circulated across social media capture more than a simple instance of classroom misconduct; they unveil the veiled brutality masquerading as pedagogy, where psychological manipulation, veiled sadism, and theatrical punishment are cunningly interwoven into the pedagogical narrative. This teacher’s calculated choreography—his feigned amusement, his precise control over violence, and his perverse fascination with suffering—exposes the true undercurrent of his actions. This is not discipline. This is not education. This is a ritual of power, executed with the precision of a predator who understands the social blindness that enables him.
This monstrous theatre is no accident. The teacher’s calculated use of language, the peculiar intimacy he fosters with his students, and the ritualistic quality of his disciplinary measures echo a long history of institutionalised sadism in educational spaces. This is not mere corporal punishment—it is something far darker. To claim that his actions are in any way congruent with traditional discipline would be to misunderstand entirely the essence of his behaviour. There exists within him an undeniable drive for gratification, one that goes beyond the realm of pedagogy and into the realm of sexual perversion. His is a pathology of control, an unholy marriage of power and pleasure.
The reference to the Marquis de Sade is disturbingly apt. De Sade, the infamous libertine philosopher, revelled in the meticulous orchestration of suffering, deriving personal euphoria from the agony of others. His perversions were so vast, so heinous, that they necessitated a new linguistic category—sadism. The eerie parallels between the tuition teacher’s actions and the depravities of de Sade are impossible to ignore. The controlled infliction of pain, the theatricality of the act, the absence of personal anger but the presence of sinister amusement—all bear the unmistakable mark of sadistic indulgence. This is no coincidence. It is the pathology of a predator who derives euphoria from suffering but disguises it as discipline.
Yet, what is even more unsettling than the actions of the teacher is the psychological response of his victim. The student, upon witnessing the social uproar, did not decry the violation but rather defended the perpetrator. This reaction, far from being surprising, is a textbook manifestation of psychological subjugation. It is a phenomenon well-documented in cases of systemic abuse: the victim, bound by an invisible chain of loyalty and psychological manipulation, defends the very person who has violated them. This is the cycle of abuse in its most insidious form—where victims become the unwitting protectors of their oppressors.
This is not an isolated event but rather an unmasking of a larger cultural pathology. The Sri Lankan tuition industry has in many instances devolved into an unregulated theatre of power, where the artificial charisma of the tutor eclipses the sanctity of education. These modern-day ‘gurus’ operate within a cult-like structure, wherein their influence is sacrosanct, their authority unchallenged. The hero-worship that many students and parents exhibit toward these figures creates an ecosystem where abuse, manipulation, and fraud thrive unchecked. In this context, the tutor in question is not an anomaly but rather an extreme manifestation of a deeply embedded rot.
The revelation that this teacher’s academic qualifications are fraudulent is merely an extension of the greater deception he embodies. He is not merely a sadist; he is a conman, a pathological liar who has built an empire of deceit. His fraudulent academic credentials, his self-anointed titles, and his theatrical pedagogy all serve one function—to craft an illusion of authority so impermeable that even the most egregious of his actions will be met with reverence rather than scrutiny.
Yet, the responsibility for this moral catastrophe cannot be placed solely on the shoulders of one man. The society that has allowed this deception to thrive, that has deified these ‘tutors’ to the point of unquestionable authority, that has normalised the abuse of children under the guise of discipline, bears equal culpability. The parents who entrust their children to these unregulated charlatans without the slightest inquiry into their credibility are complicit. The institutions that allow unqualified frauds to masquerade as educators are complicit. The social fabric that permits the psychological subjugation of victims to the extent that they defend their abusers is complicit.
What, then, is to be done? The first step must be an unrelenting scrutiny of the tuition industry. A profession that holds such profound influence over the intellectual and psychological development of children cannot be left in the hands of self-anointed ‘educators’ operating without oversight. A regulatory framework must be established—one that scrutinises not only the academic credentials of these tutors but also their psychological fitness to engage with children. The psychological wellbeing of students must be prioritised over the profit-driven machinery of the tuition industry.
Beyond institutional reforms, there must be a cultural reckoning. Parents must wake from their stupor and reject the blind idolatry of these figures. Society must abandon its passive complicity in the glorification of sadistic pedagogy. The public must cultivate an unflinching intolerance for any behaviour that even remotely resembles psychological or physical exploitation in the educational sphere.
The tragedy of the tuition teacher’s scandal is not merely that it happened, but that it was allowed to happen. The monstrous farce that unfolded before our eyes is a symptom of a society that has long ignored the insidious dynamics of power, perversion, and pedagogy. This is not merely about one sadistic tutor; it is about an entire ecosystem that enables, defends, and even venerates such figures. It is about the unchecked reign of fraudulent educators who exploit the vulnerabilities of children for their own gratification. It is about the darkness that lurks beneath the surface of what we call education.
Let this be the moment we rip apart the façade. Let this be the moment we dismantle the perverse tyranny of unregulated tuition. Let this be the moment we refuse to be silent. For silence, in the face of this depravity, is complicity itself. Where, then, is “Dr” Harini Amarasuriya, to whom so many entrusted their hopes for a renaissance—voting in faith despite the suffocating stranglehold of the Union Master, the Mahinda? Where is her voice, now that this grotesque farce demands reckoning?
