When Maestros Clash: The Rohana Weerasinghe–Jagath Wickramasinghe Feud Returns to the Spotlight
In the small but intensely passionate world of Sri Lankan music, rivalries have long simmered beneath the polished performances and reverent tributes paid to the island’s great composers. Yet few disputes have resurfaced with as much drama as the renewed rift between veteran composer Rohana Weerasinghe and celebrated music director Jagath Wickramasinghe.
What began decades ago as a professional disagreement has once again erupted in public—this time during a televised debate programme—raising questions not only about artistic ownership but also about legal accuracy and reputational damage.
A Televised Spark
The controversy reignited during an “open debate” television broadcast in Sri Lanka, where Professor Rohana Weerasinghe made striking allegations against Jagath Wickramasinghe.
During the programme, Weerasinghe claimed that Wickramasinghe had once stolen a Sri Lankan musical composition and sold it to a third party. In an even more sensational assertion, he alleged that Wickramasinghe had also taken a piano belonging to the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC).
According to Weerasinghe, these events were allegedly witnessed by fellow musician Manoj Peiris, a respected guitarist in the Sri Lankan music scene.
The accusations stunned viewers, not only because of their severity but also because the dispute had already been fought in court decades earlier.
The 1995 Lawsuit
The legal battle dates back to 1995, when Professor Rohana Weerasinghe filed a case against Jagath Wickramasinghe, reportedly submitting fifteen pieces of evidence to support his claims.
The lawsuit centered on allegations related to musical ownership and professional misconduct. For several years the case moved slowly through Sri Lanka’s legal system, drawing the attention of musicians and observers within the industry.
But when judgment was finally delivered in 1999, the verdict did not favour Weerasinghe.
The court ruled in favour of Jagath Wickramasinghe and dismissed the claims against him. Moreover, the judgment reportedly required Weerasinghe to pay damages to Wickramasinghe.
The ruling effectively closed the case at the trial level, yet the legal battle did not end there.
Appeal and Final Defeat
Unwilling to accept the verdict, Professor Weerasinghe filed an appeal in 1998 challenging the decision.
However, the appellate court ultimately rejected the challenge in 2001. The ruling stated that there was no legal case to answer against Jagath Wickramasinghe.
According to accounts from the proceedings, the dispute was characterised in court as stemming from professional jealousy rather than evidence of wrongdoing.
For many observers within Sri Lanka’s music industry, the ruling was meant to settle the matter once and for all.
But history, as the latest televised debate demonstrated, has a habit of returning to centre stage.
A Shared Musical History
The bitterness between the two composers appears all the more striking given their shared history.
Jagath Wickramasinghe joined the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation in 1987, at a time when SLBC remained the island’s most influential cultural broadcaster.
It was there that he first encountered Rohana Weerasinghe in 1989.
Both men were already rising figures in the Sri Lankan music scene. Within a year they found themselves collaborating internationally when they participated in the 1990 Asian Broadcasting Union music festival in Malaysia, organised by the Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union.
The festival showcased composers and performers from across Asia and the Pacific, offering a platform for national broadcasting institutions to present original works.
At the time, their cooperation suggested the possibility of a productive artistic partnership.
Few could have predicted that the relationship would eventually collapse into one of Sri Lanka’s most enduring cultural disputes.
A Musical Lineage
Jagath Wickramasinghe has long argued that his roots in music run deep.
He often recounts that his father was a music teacher, and that his family home served as a gathering place for many of Sri Lanka’s greatest musical minds.
Among those who reportedly visited or collaborated with the family were legendary figures such as:
-
W. D. Amaradeva
-
Somadasa Elvitigala
-
Lionel Guneratne
-
Dayananda Gunawardena
-
Premasiri Khemadasa
-
Sanath Nandasiri
For Wickramasinghe, this musical heritage forms part of his defence against accusations of plagiarism or theft.
He argues that his career was shaped by mentorship, collaboration, and immersion in Sri Lanka’s classical and modern musical traditions.
The Copyright Question
The dispute also touches on the evolving legal framework governing musical ownership in Sri Lanka.
Wickramasinghe has claimed that many of his compositions are now controlled by a company linked to the son of Professor Weerasinghe.
This claim adds another layer of complexity to the dispute, suggesting that the quarrel may involve intellectual property rights rather than merely personal grievances.
Recent legislative reforms in Sri Lanka concerning copyright and artistic ownership have reportedly strengthened the rights of original composers.
Under such legal changes, Wickramasinghe believes that ownership of certain musical works should revert to him.
If true, that shift could significantly alter the economic stakes surrounding the dispute.
A Question of Legal Accuracy
Perhaps the most sensitive issue arising from the televised debate concerns the way the historical court case was described.
During the programme, Professor Weerasinghe reportedly stated that the earlier case had been “thrown out” in 1998.
But legal records indicate that the case was actually decided in 1999 with a judgment against him, followed by a failed appeal in 2001.
The difference may appear technical, yet it carries significant implications.
Misrepresenting the outcome of a court ruling—particularly in a public broadcast—could potentially expose a speaker to legal consequences.
Some legal observers have suggested that Jagath Wickramasinghe might have grounds to initiate defamation proceedings if the statements are proven false.
Others have raised the possibility that Sri Lanka’s Attorney General could consider whether the remarks constitute contempt of court, given that they appear to contradict a recorded judicial decision.
Whether such legal action will materialise remains uncertain.
A Cultural Rivalry
Beyond the legal details, the conflict reflects deeper tensions within Sri Lanka’s creative industries.
In many artistic communities, disputes over authorship and influence are not uncommon. Music, perhaps more than any other art form, exists within a delicate ecosystem of inspiration, adaptation, and interpretation.
When two prominent composers clash publicly, the impact extends beyond their personal reputations.
It can divide fans, musicians, and industry professionals who feel compelled to choose sides.
In Sri Lanka, where musical heritage is deeply intertwined with national identity, such disagreements often acquire symbolic significance.
The Violin or the Courtroom?
For now, the renewed feud leaves observers wondering how the next chapter will unfold.
Will the disagreement return to the courtroom, with fresh litigation over statements made on television?
Or will the dispute remain confined to public debate and media commentary?
There is also a more hopeful possibility.
Sri Lanka’s musical history is filled with moments when rivals eventually reconciled, recognising that their shared commitment to art mattered more than personal differences.
An Unfinished Symphony
For many fans, the spectacle of two respected composers battling through accusations and legal arguments feels profoundly dissonant.
Both Rohana Weerasinghe and Jagath Wickramasinghe have contributed significantly to Sri Lanka’s musical heritage. Their compositions have shaped film scores, stage productions, and broadcast music for generations.
Yet their rivalry has become a story almost as famous as their songs.
Some observers jokingly suggest that instead of arguing in television studios, the two maestros should settle their differences in a more musical fashion—perhaps with a joint concert, a composition duel, or even a playful “musical wrestling match” on stage.
Imagine violins instead of legal briefs, orchestras instead of lawyers.
Until such harmony is achieved, however, the dispute remains unresolved—an unfinished symphony in Sri Lanka’s cultural life.
And the audience, like listeners awaiting the final chord of a long concerto, continues to watch and wonder who will ultimately take the final bow.