The Constitution of Sri Lanka, ultimately based on the racial, linguistic and religious dominance by virtue of the numerical strength of the Sinhalese community, remains a major stumbling- block to settling the ethnic question.
It is a block to achieving peace or communal harmony in the country as it would bars fulfilment of any political aspirations of the Tamils.
It should be acknowledged that due to Sinhala extremist politics the Tamils have many grievances. No political solution can ever be reached and constitutionally guaranteed to prevent such discriminative repercussions from occurring again.
President Mahinda Rajapakse has jettisoned all the aspirations of the Tamils for peace by prioritising a militarily repressive strategy. His own ideology called ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ emphasizes “no Norway, no federal constitution, no recognition of a Tamil homeland, no self-determination, no nationhood for Tamils, no recognition of the LTTE as sole partner in negotiation.”
Now, simply to mark time, the President proposes to enact a draft framework with appropriate amendments to the Constitution on the devolution of powers. The two-thirds majority needed for this to pass is nowhere in sight.
But this way he is hoodwinking the whole world into believing he is a genuine leader, seeking national consensus.
But if were seriously committed to a peaceful, negotiated solution, then, as a gesture of openness, the President has to junk his own ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ to create a congenial environment for a plurality of ideas.
Even if he does so, one-third of the numerical strength of the Sinhalese population will suffice to override the numerical strength of the entire Tamil population.
The Sinhala community, by virtue of their majoritarian status could thus arrive at any decision of their own at any referendum and defeat any opinions or proposals voiced by the Tamil community with regard to their aspirations and fundamental rights.
Moreover, at any time, Sinhala representatives in the legislative assembly could enact any law or frame any constitutional change arbitrarily at any time to the advantage of the Singhala community only, using their voting strength to override Tamil demands.
Unless there is will to peace and desire for harmony induced by a change of heart among Sinhalese, nothing tangible can be expected from any peace process. There are no indications at all that is in the offing.
Tamils have a very legitimate desire, as any other people, to control their own lives, to rule the conditions of their existence, and to govern themselves in their homeland, in the territorial areas they have traditionally inhabited.
The British colonial rulters have to bear considerable responsibility for the ethnic rift in the county. They were the architects of the conditions of independence in 1948. The fragile safeguards in the Constitution have proved worthless and Sinhala rulers have systematically stripped the Tamils of their basic and fundamental rights.
As such, and by virtue of accepted international norms, including the right to self-determination, Sri Lanka’s Tamils - with their own linguistic and cultural identity and identifiable homeland - are free to determine their political status, to enable them to live with equal rights with other world communities.
They are entitled to pursue their economic, social and cultural development as they see fit. It is not for another people to decide whether they may or not.
The difficulties caused by Sri Lanka’s Sinhala constitution cannot be allowed to be a bar to Tamil aspirations.
It is a block to achieving peace or communal harmony in the country as it would bars fulfilment of any political aspirations of the Tamils.
It should be acknowledged that due to Sinhala extremist politics the Tamils have many grievances. No political solution can ever be reached and constitutionally guaranteed to prevent such discriminative repercussions from occurring again.
President Mahinda Rajapakse has jettisoned all the aspirations of the Tamils for peace by prioritising a militarily repressive strategy. His own ideology called ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ emphasizes “no Norway, no federal constitution, no recognition of a Tamil homeland, no self-determination, no nationhood for Tamils, no recognition of the LTTE as sole partner in negotiation.”
Now, simply to mark time, the President proposes to enact a draft framework with appropriate amendments to the Constitution on the devolution of powers. The two-thirds majority needed for this to pass is nowhere in sight.
But this way he is hoodwinking the whole world into believing he is a genuine leader, seeking national consensus.
But if were seriously committed to a peaceful, negotiated solution, then, as a gesture of openness, the President has to junk his own ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ to create a congenial environment for a plurality of ideas.
Even if he does so, one-third of the numerical strength of the Sinhalese population will suffice to override the numerical strength of the entire Tamil population.
The Sinhala community, by virtue of their majoritarian status could thus arrive at any decision of their own at any referendum and defeat any opinions or proposals voiced by the Tamil community with regard to their aspirations and fundamental rights.
Moreover, at any time, Sinhala representatives in the legislative assembly could enact any law or frame any constitutional change arbitrarily at any time to the advantage of the Singhala community only, using their voting strength to override Tamil demands.
Unless there is will to peace and desire for harmony induced by a change of heart among Sinhalese, nothing tangible can be expected from any peace process. There are no indications at all that is in the offing.
Tamils have a very legitimate desire, as any other people, to control their own lives, to rule the conditions of their existence, and to govern themselves in their homeland, in the territorial areas they have traditionally inhabited.
The British colonial rulters have to bear considerable responsibility for the ethnic rift in the county. They were the architects of the conditions of independence in 1948. The fragile safeguards in the Constitution have proved worthless and Sinhala rulers have systematically stripped the Tamils of their basic and fundamental rights.
As such, and by virtue of accepted international norms, including the right to self-determination, Sri Lanka’s Tamils - with their own linguistic and cultural identity and identifiable homeland - are free to determine their political status, to enable them to live with equal rights with other world communities.
They are entitled to pursue their economic, social and cultural development as they see fit. It is not for another people to decide whether they may or not.
The difficulties caused by Sri Lanka’s Sinhala constitution cannot be allowed to be a bar to Tamil aspirations.
