A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Why
Mr.Subramniya Swamy is coming to the defence of Sri Lankan High Commissioner,
Mr.Prasad Kariyavasam ?
(
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.