In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.10  Which of the following best summarizes the passage?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.9 Considering the passage, what could be a potential real-world implication of Sri Lanka's current drug policy?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.8 The author likely believes that:

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.7 Which of the following best describes the structure of the argument presented in the passage?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.6 What is the author's tone regarding Sri Lanka's anti-drug operation?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.5 What is the main theme of the passage?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.4 In the passage, the pronoun 'it' in the phrase "it must not overshadow" refers to what?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.3 In the context of the passage, what does the term 'implicates' most likely mean?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.2 What can be inferred about the approach of the Sri Lankan government in its anti-drug operation?

In an era where the war against drugs often oscillates between stringent law enforcement and human rights concerns, Sri Lanka’s recent anti-drug operation, arresting some 40,000 people in a month, exemplifies this dilemma. The government’s staunch stance, as iterated by Public Security Minister Tiran Alles, reflects a resolve to combat drug trafficking. Yet, it also ignites a fiery debate over the potential erosion of civil liberties and human rights – a concern echoed by the United Nations and various international rights groups.Sri Lanka’s operation, named ‘Yukthiya’ [Justice], ostensibly targets the drug distribution networks, with significant seizures amounting to LKR 4.7 billion. However, the approach, which Public Security Minister Alles describes as non-negotiable, has raised alarms over rapid arrests and detentions, particularly of the youth. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has urged a review, citing a heavily security-based response and advocating for public health policies grounded in human rights.From an Indian perspective, the operation’s revelations are noteworthy. The Acting Inspector General of Police, Deshabandu Tennakoon, pinpointed Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and south India as primary sources for drug consignments. This implicates India not just as a bystander but as an active participant in this regional issue. The acknowledgment of south India as a source for ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine suggests a transnational dimension to India’s own drug challenges.The repercussions of Sri Lanka’s current policy are manifold. While aiming to eradicate drug trafficking, the approach risks infringing upon human rights, potentially inciting societal unrest. Moreover, the operation’s emphasis on security over public health interventions may be counterproductive in the long-term battle against drug abuse. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and international organizations, including Amnesty International, have already flagged concerns of torture, inhuman treatment, and arbitrary arrests.
India, sharing close geographical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, must observe these developments keenly. There lies an opportunity to foster collaborative anti-drug strategies that balance stringent law enforcement with human rights and public health approaches. Moreover, India’s engagement could help in addressing the transnational drug trafficking networks that affect both nations.While Sri Lanka’s determined stance in its anti-drug crusade is commendable, it must not overshadow the imperative of safeguarding human rights and embracing a more holistic approach to drug control. A collaborative regional strategy, involving countries like India, could offer a more balanced and effective solution. It is time for nations to unite in this fight, not just with an iron fist but also with a healing touch.

Q.1 According to the passage, how much in Sri Lankan Rupees (LKR) were the drug seizures valued during Sri Lanka's anti-drug operation 'Yukthiya'?