In the aftermath of the failure of the recent Geneva Talks between the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE, Colombo talks aloud about the all party conference on the resolution to the ethnic crisis.

The United National Party had been boycotting the meetings of the all party conference until its signing of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Sri Lanka Freedom Party. After the MOU being signed, the UNP announced that two senior leaders of their party would participate at the APC meetings.

With this participation of the UNP at the All Party Conference, there is a likelihood of a consensus being reached by both major Sinhalese parties on the national question. And this Alliance has been hailed as a great event in the south.

It’s the view of the Tamils that this APC will not be able to put forward a political solution that can meet the legitimate aspirations of the Tamil people. Having observed the views of the participants, the different political apparatuses they have chosen as examples, and the guidelines they have followed, it can be seen that their views are based on narrow parochial considerations.

They seem to live in a dreamland, where they think that they could recommend power sharing as found in the Indian constitution.

Ranil Wicremasinghe , who, as the then Prime Minister, gave a written commitment to consider a federal solution recognizing the right to self determination of the Tamil people, has now committed a political summersault like his predecessors and talks about an Indian model.

Inside circles reveal that the leaders of these parties –President Rajapakse and opposition leader Ranil Wicremasinghe- have agreed on power sharing as embodied in the constitution of India.The political reality is that such moves cannot satisfy the Tamil people.

Gajendrakumar Ponammbalam, TNA Parliamentarian and member of the Parliamentary consultative committee for constitutional affairs has made it clear to the international community that the constitution of India which was drawn up during the post partition period does not address any sovereignty issues similar to the Sri Lankan Tamil struggle.

Let me quote Mr.Ponammbalam: “The current Indian constitutional model can be termed a quasi-federal one. It has federal as well as strong unitary characteristics as exemplified by Article 356, which vests the President with powers to dismiss state legislature and Executive. This model came into existence in India after Pakistan, and the Bangladesh of today, separated from Pakistan. Therefore, the present Indian constitutional model did not have to address strong secessionist sentiments, and serves mainly to unite non-fissiparous ethno linguistic regions.

He added: “The Tamils have consistently stated that if a viable alternative to separation is to be considered, such an alternative will have to recognize the Tamils as a distinct Nation of people, recognize the areas of historical habitation of the Tamil speaking people, and the right to self-determination of the Tamil Nation”.

The delegates of the APC are touring in India to study the principle and practice of the Indian constitution. It is nothing but mockery that the members of the expert committee have been indicating the village level Panchayat as the basis for the sharing of powers. It is only a local council level administrative mechanism.

It ‘s relevant, here, to note that the solutions that offered power sharing at regional level, district level and provincial level have failed over the years. In such a context, Indian Panchayat Raj system will be ill-suited.

It must be stated categorically that any solution offered by the APC must meet the legitimate aspirations of the Tamil people and their demand for self governance.

An English translation of the Editorial in Uthayan, a Tamil daily, based in Colombo

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed