Military Attacks Against Constitutional Conversation

By P. Soma Palan –OCTOBER 24, 2017

P. Soma Palan

I refer to the article captioned “Constitutional Conversation by Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka – a Response”, by  Rear Admiral Dr. Sarath Weerasekera (Dr. SW), in the Daily Mirror of 17th October.

I respond, as an independent thinker, when untruths, Falsehood and defective reasoning are found in the views expressed by the writers. Having said this, I contradict some of the views expressed by the learned Dr. SW. as follows:

Unitary State

Dr. SW states “ours is not a Federal country and Sinhale (Ceylon, Sri Lanka) has been a unitary country throughout “. This is a downright lie. The word Unitary is a modern concept and relates to a Constitution and structure of a State. In the recorded history of Lanka, from the pre-historic times, there had never been a Constitutional rule. So, how can the Dr.SW say that we have been a Unitary Country throughout?  Can he with honesty say in which period of history, the country had an unbroken, continuous Unitary rule. All Rulers of the country from the legendary King Ravanan to the last King of the Kandyan Kingdom till 1815, were Monarchs. Ravana’s grandfather, Pulasthi ruled as king from the city of Pulasthinagar, which name was later changed to Polonaruwa in the Mahavamsa. Even Muthusivan and his son, Devanambiya tissa, were Hindu Telugu kings. Devambiyatissa was followed by his four brothers till the first Chola invader, from South India, who ruled for 22 years. He was followed by Chola invader Ellalan (Elara), who ruled for 44 years.  In 993 A.D. Rajaraja Cholan invaded and ruled for 24 years, followed by his son Rajendra Cholan (30 years).  In 1017 Magha from South India invaded and ruled for 36 years.  Even in the modern period, the country was ruled by four Nayakkar kings from Andhara in South India , for a total of  76 years. So, Dr.SW, where does your spurious claim stand, that the country was” unitary throughout?” Can the learned Dr. SW deny this and prove to the contrary. The labeling of the country as “Sinhale”, is a fabrication of the Sinhala racists. Geologically, there was no country till the landmass separated from the Sub-Continent of India around 9000 years B.C. The country was called “Ilankai”, in Tamil, which name was later modified to Lanka by deleting the first and the last letters of Ilankai.

Denial of Dr. Dayan Jayatilleke’s statement

Dr. SW counters Dr. Dayan J’s statement that “there were Sinhala extremists who feel that only Sinhalese should live in this country,” by saying “I have never come across in my life a single such Sinhalese”. Isn’t this a blatant lie? Dr. SW has lost his memory to remember the two communal riots of 1958 and the worst one of 1983, where the Sinhalese mobs, under State patronage, unleashed murder and destruction on the Tamils, to drive them out from the country. Isn’t the killing of innocent surrendering Tamils in the last stage of the war, in thousands, by the armed forces, amounts to wiping out the Tamils from the country? Ironically, Dr.SW is a self- illustration of Sinhala extremism, when he refers to the country as “Sinhale”, and not with the official name Sri Lanka. Isn’t the attacks on Christian Churches and Muslim Mosques and their business establishments, a manifestation that “only Sinhalese should live in the country”, which proves Dr. Dayan’s rightful assertion? He has still not come across a bandwagon of extreme nationalist/racists, as Ven. Galagoda Atte  Gnanasara Thero, Ellewansa Thero,

Dr. Nalin de Silva, Dr. Gunadasa Amerasekera, Manohara de Silva, just to mention a few, who are prominent public personalities, and thousands of their followers , who are lurking under, unknown.

Discrimination of Tamils non-existent

According to Dr. SW discrimination of Tamils is non-existent. Dr. SW states “who says Tamils are discriminated and to give at least one example where Tamils are deprived of anything by any law of the country”. One can cite a catalogue of discrimination of Tamils. He wants at least one example but, I can be generous and give a few examples of substantive ones to improve his knowledge. Discrimination is something that has to be experienced and not in constitutional guarantees and laws.

1. Isn’t the Constitution ‘per se’ discriminatory, when it stipulates that the religion of the majority Sinhalese, Buddhism, will have the “foremost place”? Does it not mean that other religions, including the Hinduism of the Tamils, are relegated to a secondary place?

2. Discrimination in employment opportunities. Can the Dr. SW give the total cadre of the defense forces, the Army, Navy, Air Force and the Police and the number of Tamils in the armed forces. Then, he will know the extent of discrimination of the Tamils. Whereas, U.S.A and Indian defense forces are fully representative of various ethnic groups of their countries. American Negroes are very conspicuous in their armed forces.

Read More