Violence in Sri Lanka appears so common place that never does a day pass without the media , both electronic and print, reporting of cases of murder , assault , robbery, rape, extortion and a varied range of criminal activity ranging from the loss of life to the loss of one’s possessions.

So much is turning on two words, Unitary and Federal, as the debate rages on about their constitutional implications for Sri Lanka. The Sinhalese seem so closely wedded to the unitary state concept that they have lost sight of the very thing they are trying to prevent, the breakup of the country. Obviously, we are perplexed.

Sri Lankan President Rajapakse’s recent comments on the British-model of power devolution have provoked a healthy debate. He has vaguely expressed his willingness to follow the British way to pacify separatism within a unitary setup. Interestingly, many commentators from both sides have responded negatively. ‘British circumstances are different therefore inappropriate for us’ is the crux of their arguments.

“Under no circumstances would we consider the homeland concept of the Tamil people and any power sharing mode as an alternative would be strictly within the paradigm of a Unitary constitution�. This or words to this effect are that of the President of Sri Lanka Mahinda Rajapaksa in an exclusive interview with Reuters on 13 February 2006. Don’t these words portray the image of a feudal dynasty ruler who has no idea of changing the entrenched imperialistic thinking?

The demand from some civic groups to reconstitute the ‘Constitutional Council’ (CC) would give the impression that it would make a substantial contribution to good governance which this country so desperately needs. There is no doubt that the objectives of the 17th Amendment which creates the CC are most relevant particularly in regard to depoliticizing appointments to key institutions of government.

Every time a new Sri Lankan president is elected, it is customary to promise “a new approach� will be undertaken to solve all political and social evils. When Mahinda Rajapakse narrowly won the election in November, he pledged to immediately implement his grand plan—Mahinda Chinthana or Mahinda’s Vision. More than 100 days into Rajapakse’s rule, however, the situation in Sri Lanka has taken a drastic turn for the worse.

The events that are taking place after the Peace Talks were held in Geneva on the 22nd and the 23rd of February are casting a dark shadow on the possibility of the second round of the Talks that is expected to commence on the 21st of April 2006. There are several obstacles that have to be overcome if the Peace Talks are to be a reality.

The disturbing elements are:

Sri Lanka is once again at a critical point in its contemporary political history. After the ceasefire entered into with the LTTE by Ranil Wickremesinghe slid close to a rupture after a few years of peace, the two parties are trying to resurrect the no-violence pact.

The first session of direct negotiations between the Liberation Tigers and the government of President Mahinda Rajapakse in Geneva last month were every bit as acrimonious as had been feared. That there wasn’t a complete breakdown of the talks, as well as the tenuous ceasefire - the topic under discussion, was undoubtedly due to the indefatigable efforts of the Norwegian brokers.

The Ceasefire Agreement is at the heart of the contest between two antithetical visions of what Sri Lanka should be.

It was clear, even as it was being read out by the Norwegian facilitators, that the joint statement by the Liberation Tigers and the Sri Lankan government following two acrimonious days of talks in Geneva, was going to ignite a crisis in Colombo.

Ever since the first round of talks in Geneva on strengthening the CFA concluded, Colombo has been preoccupied with one matter: did the LTTE outwit the Sri Lanka government delegation or not. And to feed such speculation further, attorney-at-law H. L. de Silva PC, resorted to naked sophistry claiming something which never happened – that of the CFA being amended during the negotiations.

government for covering up child abuse in the south Just because India tolerates child abuse, it is okay for the Sri Lankan government to do the same? He claims that the government has been trying for 36 years to curb child abuse in the south.

The CFA was hanging by a thread when the Sri Lanka delegation and the LTTE met for talks in Geneva. The central issue was ceasefire violations, and both sides agreed to mutual de-escalation. The challenge now is for President Rajapakse to redeem his pledge to put the brakes on the paramilitary, and for LTTE to reciprocate by halting the violence on its side.

As violence intensified in the north soon after the Sri Lankan presidential election last November, all eyes were turned on the claymore mines and assassinations of military personnel taking place there, and on how they were affecting the peace process.

The first round of talks on the implementation of the Cease Fire agreement has been conducted in Geneva. We are aware of the situation of a war breaking when the peace talks with former prime minister Ranil Wickremasinghe broke and of conditions worsening when Mahintha Rajapakse assumed power as the new Sri Lankan President. However, the Tamil Eelam Leadership, aspiring for a solution to the Tamil Eelam national issue through peace talks, offered a fresh chance to the new President.