Tamil grievances needs to addressed politically

(Speech by S. Thavarajah at the public meeting on Sri Lanka - the present situation and the way forward organised by The Campaign for Democracy, Justice, Peace and Unity in Sri Lanka in coordination with other mainstream democratic Sri Lankan political parties and organisations was held on Saturday 18th October 2008 at Quakers Meeting House, Bush Road, Wanstead, London, E11 3AU).

by S. Thavarajah

(October 19, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) I will begin my speech on the presumption that the audience are fully aware that the Tamil Speaking People of Sri Lanka have genuine grievances which need to be addressed politically. If anybody has a view contradictory to it, sorry, I am not in a position to elucidate them of what the grievances are due to time constrains.

Let me cite an example to demonstrate the complexity of our issue. Say a person is suffering from diabetics. If he or she is not treated to keep the sugar level under control, that will lead to lot of complications such as kidney trouble, heart disease, eye problem, un-healable wounds etc. No doctor will ever try treating these symptoms without first giving medicine to bring the sugar level under control.

It is so with the complexity of political issues Sri Lanka is faced with today. What are these complex issues? Some call it armed struggle, another call it militancy, another say it is terrorism, then there is the Tamil Diaspora extending their unrestrained support for such actions, the newly awakened TamilNadu factor trying to show their sympathy or concern, what are all these? These are all outbursts of the untreated main cause. As far as the main illness remains unattended these outbursts will continue in some form or other.

Now let me look at the issues subjectively.

Many post-independent legislative enactments, administrative directives and constitutional changes were made without the consent of the majority of the Tamils; some of them were in fact detrimental to them. These actions of the Governments of the past resulted in alienating the Tamils from the mainstream politics of the country and forced them to look for alternative political arrangement to secure their rights. The political demands of the Tamils today is the resultant of what has evolved out of reaction to events.

Many attempts were made by the Tamil leaders of the past to bring about a reasonable solution. But, all the attempts resulted in a series of broken promises and betrayals. All the passive resistance of the Tamils, for their fair share of power, were crushed by use of force and at times ended up in communal violence. This has lead to the growth of militancy.

With the growth of militancy, violence has become a vicious circle. What is to be noted here with regret is, in spite of almost four decades of armed conflict and bloodshed; the grievances of the Tamil people still remain un-resolved.

A new dimension has got added to the issue during these four decades of armed struggle. The Muslims in the North and East have felt that they are insecure in the hands of armed groups and as a whole in a Tamil dominant political arrangement in those areas.

After a lot of bloodshed, came about the Indo Sri Lanka Agreement of July 1987 and the 13th Amendment to the Constitution which flowed from it. It is the contention of those Tamils, who subscribe to the view that the 13th amendment is embodied with inbuilt flaws, that it will not suffice the aspirations of the Tamils. The three decades of devolution experience also favours their view point.

Lot of attempts were made after the Indo-Lanka agreement, to bring about a reasonable solution, but all failed allowing the militancy again to triumph.

The Mangala Moonasinghe commission recommended for a power devolution based on the Indian system. The only point of discontent by the Tamil leadership on this report was the bifurcation of the merged North and East province. No effort was taken to implement it.
Then came the parliamentary select committee headed by Professor G. L. Peris. His report too has found a resting place in the Parliament archives.

Presuming that Prof. Peris has failed in producing tangible solution, President Chandrika Bandarayake started a series of deliberations with all the parties. The deliberations went on for more than six months and finally presented a constitutional amendment to parliament, which is popularly known as August 2000 proposal. I had the privilege to participate in all these meetings and it is my earnest view that none of the major Political parties had a desire for substantial devolution of powers. It is true even today, I would say, without any hesitation.

In the six rounds of talk between the UNP Government and the LTTE, between September 2002 and March 2003, no talks were held on substantial issues. This is also another indicator as to what extend we are desirous of resolving the issue.

Finally we have APRC sitting for almost two years. I was a member of APRC and took part in about 35 of its deliberations. It would not be ethical for me to comment on the proceedings of the APRC, but, I would say one thing there is no desire or willingness on the part of the major political parties to part with the power.

There is a reason why these political parties do not want to part with power. They represent majority Sinhalese, and most of the Sinhalese have a fear that any devolution of powers to Tamil dominant areas would ultimately lead to secession.

So how can we allay the fear of these majority Sinhalese and find a solution to meet with the aspirations of the Tamils and Muslims. Out of all the discussions, pacts and agreements we have had since Banda-Chelva pact of 1956 to date, the Indo-Lanka agreement has a speciality. It is the only pact that got implemented on the grounds, may be to a lesser degree than what was originally envisaged.

Although initially there was resistance for the indo-Lanka agreement, people are now accustomed with the provincial council system. Hence, implementing the 13th amendment in full, i.e. empowering the provincial councils with the full powers and functions as stipulated in the amendment, would hardly meet with resistance in the South, except in respect of police powers and land. This has to be done in the first instance to demonstrate the Government’s willingness to resolve the issue politically.

But, majority of the Tamils may not be contented with the 13th amendment as a final solution. In the next step the Government has to announce a package with more devolution of powers with strings of conditions and time framework attached to it for its implementation. For example, one such condition could be that more devolution would be granted only after the elected provincial councils of the North and East agree to propagate and work against any secessionist idea and to demonstrate their willingness to work within a united Sri Lanka. A time framework could be set out to achieve this target. Another condition could be that the province should be free of violence and the law and order situation under control before that province is empowered with police powers. Such a step by step arrangement may help to allay the fears amongst the Sinhalese.

To overcome the argument that the provincial council system is a white elephant, granting of asymmetric system of devolution to the North and East provinces could also be considered.
These are some of my thoughts; there are many more speakers to come out with their opinions. Whatever the difference of opinions we may have, one thing is quite certain. Sri Lanka needs a political solution, a solution accommodating the concerns and aspirations of the Tamils and Muslims of the country.

Thank you.

- Sri Lanka Guardian