“North And East Are Historic Habitation Of Tamil Speaking People” M. A. Sumanthiran
By Maryam Azwer
M. A. Sumanthiran
Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa recently said that contrary to what is set out in the 13th Amendment, police powers cannot be given to the North and the East. The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) sees this as a violation which it says cannot be justified by a public servant.
In an interview with The Sunday Leader, TNA MP and Attorney-at-law M. A. Sumanthiran expressed his views on this matter, as well as other issues pertaining to the Tamil people, that have been in the limelight in recent times.
Excerpts from the interview:
Q: Defence Secretary, Gotabaya Rajapaksa has said that the full implementation of the 13th Amendment is not possible, because police powers cannot be given to the North and the East. What is the TNA’s response to this?
A: The defence secretary is not competent to justify violation of the constitution. He breaches all rules. As a public servant, his duty is to implement the law. Even politicians, ministers and others, can’t justify violating the constitution… the secretary defence should not be allowed to make such pronouncements against the constitution.
Q: In a recent interview with the BBC the defence secretary has also questioned why the Northern Province is viewed as ‘a predominantly Tamil place,’ and has also said that Sri Lankans must have the freedom to live where they want. What do you have to say about this?
A: In a country where people have the freedom to move anywhere and live in any place, I don’t think any particular community can claim that any particular area is exclusively theirs and consequently others cannot come and live there. To that extent, what the defence secretary has said is correct. But, it is a fact that Sri Lanka is not a homogenous society. In the Indo-Lankan accord that Sri Lanka signed, there is a recognition that the North and the East are the historic habitation of the Tamil speaking people who have lived in those places, in that region, together with other people. So it is not that it is exclusively theirs in the sense that others cannot live, but it is a fact that it is in those areas that they have historically lived. The objection that we have is to the government forcibly changing the demographic pattern. If anyone wants to voluntarily migrate to either the North or the East, they are most welcome. Persons of any community are welcome, but the state should not get involved in engineering a process so as to change the demography.
Q: And do you see this happening?
A: It is happening. I myself have placed evidence of that in parliament last October when I presented a report with photographic evidence that in the Jaffna peninsula itself, on the North Eastern coast, people who lived in certain parts are not allowed to go there. They have been put in transit camps on the other side of the road, while fishermen from the South have been allowed to go live in those people’s houses and take part in fishing and other commercial activities. In the Mullaitivu coast, that’s happening.
In certain parts of Mannar, that’s happening. These are all with a view to forcibly change the demography. Many parts of the North, and even in the East, a lot of the paddy fields that were previously cultivated by Tamil farmers and Muslim farmers, today others are cultivating, and these farmers have no access those places. There’s a place called Kanguveli in the Eastern Province with a large section of Muslim farmers and some Tamil farmers, in Mullaitivu district, and a lot of places. The army is engaged in paddy cultivation. All this is wrong, and the defence secretary of all people knows that these are happening, if not being the architect of these things.
Q: Has the TNA decided on an official position regarding the Parliamentary Select Committee?
A: TNA decided on our position with regard to the Parliamentary Select Committee process in September last year. On the 2nd of September, when the TNA leader met the president, and agreed to restart the bilateral talks, there was an agreement with regard to the Parliamentary Select Committee also. That agreement was later recorded in the minutes of the bilateral talks on the 16th of September. So that is the TNA position, that has not changed. And that is not just the TNA position, that is the agreed position between the TNA and the government, and what it says is that after the TNA and government reach consensus with regard certain substantive issues, the TNA will join the PSC process. We identified those substantive issues later on in the process, at a meeting held on the 20th of October last year, about ten or twelve issues, and we drew up a time table to discuss those. There were three meetings in December, in which one of those matters were discussed and then three more meetings were fixed for the 17th, 18th and 19th of January, and the government delegation failed to turn up for those meetings, although we went and sat there for those three days. So, the agreed position between the TNA and the government, still remains the TNA position.
Q: Constitutions of Tamil political parties still have a clause for a separate state. Is this still the long term goal of the TNA?
A: That’s a misunderstanding. If you’re asking me the question from the Hindu report, which has been reproduced in some Sri Lankan newspapers also, the reference there is to the ITAK’s constitution.
The ITAK’s constitution does not make its aim to create a separate state. That clause has actually been in the Hindu website, after the news item a PDF file is attached, and one can see in the Tamil version, which is the original version of the constitution, it starts with the words “In a united Ceylon, a federal set up” and then it goes on to say, a Tamil self rule area, and a Muslim self rule area. Now that is the part that is quoted and is being misrepresented, saying that the ITAK constitution calls for two separate, or three separate sovereign countries – leaving the Sinhala aside, a separate Tamil country and a separate Muslim country. But that is not what is there. If anybody reads that, it starts with the words “Within a united Ceylon, in a federal set up” and goes on to say that there must be an autonomous Tamil region, and an autonomous Muslim region. This constitution was made in 1949, and in the election manifesto of 1970, [the ITAK] very clearly called on the people to reject any candidate who stood for the separation of the country. So the whole basis of this speculation is wrong.
Q: Following the fast recently carried out by Tamil prisoners, the government has promised to resolve the post-war Tamil prisoners issue within a month. Has there been any progress on this matter?
A: We’ll have to wait and see. There are three hundred and nine persons against whom no charges have been filed, and they are still in remand for over three years. Our demand was that if you’re not charging them, you must release them. So what the government has undertaken to do is that within this one month time, whoever against whom they have decided to file charges, those charges will be filed within that one month.
There will be another lot of people to whom they will offer rehabilitation, and if they are willing to take the offer of rehabilitation, those persons will be sent to rehabilitation, and released. There will be yet another third category of persons who will be released.
The government says one of these three things will be done as far as the prisoners are concerned. Now, another problem is that even those against whom there are cases pending, those cases are getting dragged for years.
If they are going to file fresh charges also, against another set of people, our demand was that that must be quickly completed. For that they have said, they will set up three new special high courts. One in Mannar, one in Vavuniya, one in Anuradhapura. That also they have undertaken to set up within that one month time. We will keep reminding [the government] that these things must be done within that one month.
Q: What do you feel about the rehabilitation process the government is carrying out?
A: We have commended the rehabilitation process. We appreciate very much the government’s decision to rehabilitate and release those 11,600 persons, or most of them, through that process. The rehabilitation component of that process was also very good, but after they are released there are many issues that have arisen, which we are not happy about at all. There have been re-arrests, despite them possessing certificates saying that they have undergone this rehabilitation. So the different arms of the government seem to be functioning very differently. They have various restrictions even after they are released, as to their movement, and the reintegration into society part has not been done very well. They are finding it difficult to establish themselves, find livelihoods, so much more needs to be done in that respect.
In that case, will all the Tamils move from all the other Provinces leaving their assets ?! Unless we, as a nation accept the fact that there can be no separate provinces for one ethnic group and move on, we will never move on!!
The secessionism movement since 1949 has two form of struggle
1) Since 1949,Non-Violent of civial disobdeience movement. ITAK until 1972 -the period.
1976 May ,TULF Vaddukoddai Resoultion included TAMIL SEPARATE STATE.
The separate state as justification of ARMED STRUGGLE.The resolution called and offer EELAM CITIZENSHIP TO TAMIL-SPEAKING people livng in any part of the ISLAND and to TAMILS of ELEAM ORIGIN living in any part of the WORLD.
Relatively and conditionally this period was appaer to be secessiont movemet of TAMIL Eelam non-violent form.
2) Separatism of Myth of Eelam trun into VIOLENCE & ARMED STRUGGLE IN REALITY 1972.
In new form of Tamil Eelam turn into TERRORIST ARMED STRUGGLE.
First TULF and Second TNA having moral and mertial support for Armed Groupes of TERRORIST CELLS in North-East.
Terrorist out-fits came into being,TELO LTTE,EPRLF and EROS at instigation by RAW fromed Eelam National LIberation FRont in 1985 Aprial.This unified forces against the Sri Lanakan Government.
In Thimpu delebration in principle groupe of TAMIL SECESSIONST that is the five Militant groupes, LTTE,PLOTE TELO,EPRLF ans EROS and moderate TULF -demand that the Sri Lankan Govt must ACCPECT four non-negotiable basic principle as follow;
a) Tamils as Nation b)Tamil- Homeland gurentee Terrorital Integraity
.c)Right of self-detremanation of Tamils Nation.
d) Recognition of the right of FULL CITIZENSHIP TAMILS who look upon SRI LANKAN AS THIER COUNTRY.
TULF & TNA and other Tamil terrorst out-fit were armed struggle look for INTERNATIOALIZATION OF ARMED SEPARATISM ;motive was to
SPLIT SRI LANKAN INTO two-NATION.
Now all Sri lankan inculuding SINHALESE TAMILS MUSLIMES AND OTHER COMMUNITIES , TOGHTER defeted LTTE terroist by PEOPLE OF SRI LANKA. This WAR anainst SPLIT our country nation and people of SRI LANKA.
After defeted of Tamil LTTE sepraratist by people of SRI LANK
Now FEW HANDFUL OF TERROIST LOOKING FOR internationztion of Tamil-Eelam terrorist demand on other way; on so-called WAR CRIMES nad HUMAN RIGHTS to be invegisation are illogical and groundless factors.
Tamil people griverances and rights need to address as INTERNAL MATTER.
TNA having rights used all DEMOCARTIC MENS and TOOLS achive such demands are reasonable.
BUt NO Land righs and Police power are OUT OF QUESTION after 40 yeras of exprinces of TERRORIST act by Tamil political parties.
TNA must not forget past her own act of Politics in our ISLAND was to divied.
We want TNA has to play NATIOANAL POLITICIAL ROLE and AGEAND TO ACHIVED UNITED and DIVERISTY in Island.
Secular DEMOCARCY and PEACEFUL POLITICS are the asprtation of MAJORITY COMMUNITY OF SRI LANKA.
There is undeniable fact or TRUTH , SINHALESES OF 99.% are NOT ANTI-TAMILS. We are more broard-minded, open and secular in 2600 yeras of our history. OF CIVILIZATION.
I am not talk on Politics or political parties of Sri lankan,this is differnt from politics aspriation of people of SRI LANKAN are more wide and broadminded and DEMOCRTTIC , than politics of island.
This had been originiated from vast exprinces of 2600 years of histrocial KNOWLEDGE. AND EXPRINCES. our civilization.
SINHALESES 1% BROARD MINDED THEY ARE LIVE IN NDP.
ILANKAI TAMILAR (EELAM TAMIL) HAVE MORE THAN 3000 ___ 4000
YEARS OF HISTORY RAVANA RAMAYANA RAMA SITHA .* ELLALA,
PANDYA , CHOLA , KULAKODDAN . SANKKILI , RAJASINKA .*
This is today not 3-4000 years ago.
Well said Sumenthiran; this kota clown and war criminal need a lesson on Tamil heritage and language.
After all hew is an ex sherbat saleman in USA.
You said it right Mr Sumanthiran. “Tamil Speaking Paople”!!!! Does not mean Ethinc TAMIL People! Tamils ethnically originate from South India . The Dravidian nation which was the home to Chola and Pandya people who invaded Lanka on numerous occasions thousands of years ago but were always chased back to India – except on the last occasion when the Chola King Elara was defeated by Lankan King Dutugemunu, he didn’t chase all the Chola invaders back – thus the problem Sri Lanka is facing now.
The North and the East belongs to the Tamils and we will get it even if we must die for it. It is our heritage.
The Lost Rights of the Tamils
By C. Naganathan
At the 14th Convention of the ITAK in May 2012, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) leader R Sampanthan was spot on when he said,
“…Up to 500 years ago, the Tamil people established their own governments, and governed themselves. Our party symbolizes a time in history…during which our people had their own sovereign Tamil governments…Our fundamental objective is to regain our community’s Home, its historical habitat and its sovereignty.
Until the 10th century AD, the people in the island irrespective of their racial background were scattered all over the island with the Tamil settlements more towards Rajarata (North of Anuradapura and close to Polonnaruva). According to the historian Dr. M. Gunasingham, from around 10th to 13th century A.D, (Subsequent to the Chola domination of Sri Lanka in the 10th century A.D), people who identified themselves as Buddhists and Hela/Sihala shifted their seats of rule from the ancient kingdoms of Anuradapura/ Polonnaruva (ruled alternatively by both Sinhala and Tamil kings) towards South, West and Central Sri Lanka while the people who identified themselves as Saiva and Demela moved their ruling structures from these same regions to the North and East of the island. For many centuries from then, until the Portuguese conquest of the Jaffna kingdom from the Tamil king Cankili 11, the Tamils and the Sinhalese were living in two separate regions in Sri Lanka. Just like the Sinhalese, the Tamil people of Sri Lanka also established their own kingdom/government, and governed themselves independently. The Tamil kingdom, which extended up to the eastern province, came under Portuguese domination in 1621, and this was how the Tamils lost their sovereignty, independence and their traditional homeland.
Even after the European colonialists (Portuguese, Dutch and British) arrived, until the British united the Tamil North to the Sinhala South in 1833 for their convenience in administration, the Tamil speaking areas remained a federal region. The Portuguese, when they captured the Tamil kingdom, appointed a captain-major as the governor of Jaffna and administered it as a distinct political unit. The Dutch continued the same. The British gave credence to a united Ceylon in 1833, ignoring the historical realities that existed. This uniform administrative structure and the idea of a “united Ceylon” spelt doom for the Tamils’ distinctiveness, again, something the Sinhalese rulers had failed to achieve.
When the European colonialists arrived, what all of them clearly observed and experienced during their period was that, in the island of Sri Lanka, there were two different Nations (Sinhalese and Tamils) having two different languages, religions, cultures, and living in two well defined and clearly and naturally demarcated (with thick jungles, lakes, river, etc) land areas with their own kingdoms within their traditional lands. The Tamils lived as a majority within their separate land area (North & East) and the Sinhalese also lived as a majority within their land area (South, West & Central). The British, on seeing the naturally existing borders of the two ethnic groups used their technology to demarcate them as two separate regions (occupied by two separate ethnic groups) and created the maps for the first time somewhere in the 1800s. In their map published in England, the area that constituted the traditional homeland of the Tamils is unmistakably shown to extend from Chilaw northward and eastward to a point near Madawchchi; south of Padavil Kulam extending to the Trincomalee district; and the Batticaloa district down to the mouth of the Walawa Ganga in the south.
Later in 1833, the British created one government with one centralized, unitary form of administration under a governor in Colombo without the consent of the people, and in doing so ended the hopes for a Tamil nation as a distinct political entity, something that no conqueror had managed to do – to stifle the flame of an independent existence. The introduction of a unitary form of government (creating a single majority) was a tragic step in the wrong direction which led to the Sinhalese hegemony over the Tamils. It was the grave mistake on the part of the British to bind together in a common polity the two ethnic groups with no common links, and to bind them together by the whip they wielded. It was a death knell for the Tamils’ distinctiveness, freedom, independence and their centuries-old sovereignty.
In his speech Sampanthan only speaks about restoring our legitimate rights which we lost to the Sinhalese via the colonial rulers (British).