Why Mr.Subramniya Swamy is coming to the defence of Sri Lankan High Commissioner, Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam ?
| by L. Annadoure
( April 2, 2013, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Sri Lankan diplomatic mission resident in Chennai is bound in International law to act befitting the purport of its mission. The Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu who reflecting the collective voice and sentiments of the people of Tamil Nadu or rather the voice of the Tamil speaking people all the world over wrote to the Central Government not to recognize Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam, the Sri Lankan High Commissioner as his press notes and the interviews tended to be detrimental to the interest of the Tamil people ,for he has attempted to pit one people against another and alienate the Tamil people from other States in India.
Some of the functions which may be exercised by an High Commissioner are the ones pertaining to representing Sri Lanka and protecting its Nationals in the receiving State and to promote friendly relations between the sending State and the receiving State.
All of the resolutions which have been passed unanimously in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly are only the reflections of collective voice of the people. The High Commissioner Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam knows pretty well of the prevalence of volatile and nebulous situation in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry whose cause is the country which he is representing .
The student community in entirety in Tamil Nadu has arisen in unison demanding Mr.Mahinda Rajapakshe, the President of Sri Lanka be accused as perpetrator of Genocide against Eelam Tamils, to conduct a referendum to know about the aspiration and determination of the people to have the kind of polity they must have and to conduct an enquiry by an independent International Body into the crime of genocide and other war crimes committed by him.
Mr. Prasad Kariyavasam equally knows well that all the political parties have been agitating and demanding all along that the Central Government of its own accord to bring about an effective resolution which would purport to stigmatize Mr.Mahinda Rajapaskse as a perpetrator of Genocide and pressing for institution of an independent International enquiry to probe into the commission of genocide and other war crimes.
Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam knows too that the entirety of people in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, people in some parts of the country and the political parties except the Congress Party have been speaking against the Central Government in having betrayed the Tamils’ interests by deliberately failing to bring in a resolution , failing to participate in the informal enquiry and for having read out an argument praising the Sri Lanka so as to bring in resolution in regards of the Sri Lankan Government is least bothered about.
Madurai District president of Hindu Peoples Party has filed a Public Interest Litigation writ petition against the Central Government and sought a direction for closure of Indian High Commission in Sri Lanka before the High Court Madurai Branch and the said petition has come to be dismissed as the petitioner has no locus standi to maintain the application and in fact the filing of such writ petition shows the party president representing the voice of its members who show the pulse and voice of the people in general.
The Sri Lankan High Commissioner Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam would state that the decision taken by the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu in protesting against the participation of Sri Lankan players, umpires and other officials in the IPL matches proposed to be played in Tamil Nadu is condemnable and while making such condemnatory remarks he also pointed out lack of wisdom in the earlier decisions like the refusal to allow a football team of the Royal College of Colombo to be trained in Chennai and refusal to host the 20th Asian athletics meet in Chennai and he has assertively stated that instead of diplomatically resolving the political matters involving the two countries it is bad to comingle sports with politics and that the approach of the Chief Minister makes future prospects of players very bleak.
The question that now arise is whether the High Commissioner Mr.Prasad Karivavsam has really been directed by the Sri Lankan Government to make such condemnatory note against the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and if he admits that he has been authorised to make such a statement then his act should be contemptible because if the sending State perceives that it has been aggrieved over the decision of the Chief Minister of State it has take up the matter with the Central Government. The sending State is precluded from making such a condemnatory note against the chief Minister of State openly and after all, what kind interest Sri Lanka may have in Tamil Nadu except some interests over some Sri Lankan students studying in various institutions, spy on the affairs of Tamil Nadu and to use the mission for spreading propaganda against the Tamils and were the High Commissioner to say that his mission is much more than that then people in Tamil Nadu are not there to learn anything from Sri Lanka culturally or to benefit economically from a rogue state which racially cleansed the Eelam Tamils. The acts of vilification and aggressive posturing against the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu will not come under the purview and ambit of performance of an official act. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relation , 1961 lays down vesting of certain privileges, immunities from criminal prosecution and civil litigation to some extent on Head of consul and consular staff, Head of Embassies and their staff and High Commission and its staff and while enjoying such privileges and immunities and inviolability the High Commissioner, Sri Lanka owes certain responsibilities and he should not make unnecessary comments and condemnatory note.
In Sri Lanka, every one in Government would make one statement or another and there is no hard and fast rule that a particular person alone should speak on behalf of Government of the decisions or policy of Government and there is a saying in current in Tamil Nadu which runs thus: ‘who ever takes a cudgel is an extortionist.’ When others have spoken, either Mr.Mahinda Rajapakshe would make entirely different statement or at his instance somebody would yet make entirely a different statement. The Defence secretary would decide on the policies of the Government and make his own statement.
So for any matter affecting the interests of the sending State is concerned the President , Mr.Mahinda Rajapakshe may register his objection through the Foreign affairs Ministry of the receiving State India and the High Commissioner has absolutely no right to issue a press statement or give interviews criticising the decisions and resolutions passed in the Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu and Mr.Prasad Karivasam may be referred to Article 41 of Vienna Convention On Diplomatic Relation, 1961 which reads as follows:
Article 41
1.without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state. They also have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of that State.
2.All official business with receiving state entrusted to the mission by the sending State shall be conducted with or through the Ministry for foreign affairs of the receiving state or such other ministry as may be agreed.
Mr.Prasad Kariavasam has already stigmatized the Tamil Nadu students as terrorists which statement of his highly contemptible not one behoving to the station of an High Commissioner, it is unwarranted on his part and for the said act alone he has to pack his baggage and leave. The Central Government too has to notify the Sri Lankan Government of its refusal to recognize Mr.Prasath Kariyavasam as the High Commissioner of Sri Lanka in view of Article 43(b) of Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and thus respect the requisition made by the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.
Under these circumstances, Mr.Subramniya Swamy who has become the spokesperson for Central Government these days has released a press statement hinting that the Police is necessitated to launch a criminal prosecution suo moto against Mr.Vaiko who since demanded the arrest of Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam because the High Commissioner has said the Sinhalese who originally hailed from the states of Orissa and Bengal have to be given protection when ever they come over India with a corrupt intention of driving a wedge between the states, weaken the Tamils’ demand and unduly influence the Central Government.
Here Mr.Subramaniya Swamy must note that the voice of the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and other political parties are only the voices of the people. Mr.Subramaniya Swamy may as well appear before the concerned police station and file a complaint against Mr.Vaiko instead of asking the police to foist a case suo moto. Tamil People know extremely well as to why Mr.Subramniya Swamy is coming to the defence of Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam! We may presume Mr.Prasath Kariyavasam is conversant with What Mr.Mahinda Rajapaskhe has answered while he has been at Thirupathi. He said that the people here in India have right to demonstrate. What Mr.Mahinda Rajapashe has said in Sri Lanka in respect of Jappna University Students who have been arrested and incarcerated? He said that the Students have a right to dissent. Therefore, Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam is in the wrong in having branded Tamil Nadu Students’ community terrorists and the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu is in her own right to have written the letter urging the Central Government to take steps to recall Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam.
Mr.Subramniya Swamy has recently posted a statement in a web site stating that all the political leaders in Tamil Nadu who after having received money from Pakistan are protesting over the visit of Mr.Mahinda Rajapaske and the said statement of his is unfounded, baseless and therefore the Police has to launch prosecution suo moto against Mr.Subramaniya Swamy who has made the libellous and defamatory statement.
