[
comment
by
tamilnation.org
"The ' theatre of spin' staged by the Brahmin controlled Hindu will not come
as a surprise to the Tamil people - not because it is Brahmin controlled but
because, at all times during the past several years, the Hindu has been
concerned to advance New Delhi's perceived
geo political
strategic interests in the Indian ocean region, whilst expressing
seeming concern for the suffering of the Tamil people in the island of Sri
Lanka. In this way the Hindu and New Delhi seek to secure their ability to
play the 'Tamil card' through the likes of Anandasangaree et al. The
Hindu would have us believe that the UNP/SLFP pact provides 'maximum
devolution'. And the Hindu headline states that the UNP/SLFP pact avoids the
'unitary model'. What the pact does is to avoid mentioning the word
'unitary' and that is a somewhat different matter. The pact provides
for regional 'administrators'. Actually, in the 1987 Provincial Councils
Act, the Tamils had the benefit of not simply 'administrators' but
even 'Governors' - Governors who would 'administer' the provinces. The
undeniable constitutional reality is that the
Sri Lanka constitution vests executive power in the President
and it was this which underpinned the
'comic opera' reforms of 1987. The regional Governor was a servant of
the Executive President. The UNP/SLFP pact does not seek to abolish
the Executive Presidency. Neither does it provide for the repeal of the
current Sri Lanka unitary constitution. At least,
Richard
A. Boucher, US Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs
avoided 'spin' when he declared
" We are pleased that the government and
the LTTE are committed to peace talks, to go to Geneva and to begin
discussions again. We think it is important to discuss
all
the issues. It is also important to begin a process that can lead to
a serious negotiation, and eventually, to a political solution with
legitimate interest of all the communities: of Tamils, of Muslims, of
Sinhalese. It can be accommodated with a unitary Sri Lanka."
Having said that, it appears that the
UNP/SLFP pact is intent on continuing with the
'comic opera' - whilst
Tamil
Eelam burns. Some hundred years ago in 1907, the British combined
their attack on rising Indian militancy (Baghat
Singh
et al) with the offer of the Morley Minto constitutional 'reforms'. It
was the usual mixture of stick and carrot. The carrot was directed to
diffuse popular resistance to alien rule. The Morley Minto 'reforms' created
a constitutional frame within which colonial rule may be perpetuated with
the assistance of collaborators from the ruled. It was the tried and tested
gambit of a colonial power when called upon to contend with a rising
national consciousness - a gambit which is not without significance today.
The 'reform' proposals sought to set up provincial legislatures (with very
limited jurisdiction) where the majority would be nominees of the British
government - whilst at the same time securing that executive power
remained vested in the British Viceroy in New Delhi. Aurobindo's response
was immediate and caustic. He wrote in Bande Mataram in June 1907, under the
title 'Comic Opera Reforms':
"Mr.Morley has made his pronouncement and a long expectant
world may now go about its ordinary business with the satisfactory
conviction that the conditions of political life in India will be precisely
the same as before... We find it impossible to discuss Mr.Morley's reforms
seriously, they are so impossibly burlesque and farcical. Yet they have
their serious aspect. They show that British despotism, like all despotisms
in the same predicament, is making the time honoured, ineffectual effort to
evade a settlement of the real question by throwing belated and now
unacceptable sops to Demogorgnon." ]
COLOMBO: Monday's
agreement, signed by the Sri Lanka Freedom
Party (SLFP) and the United National Party
(UNP), to resolve the ethnic conflict in the
north and east, subject to further
discussion and ratification, envisages
maximum devolution of powers to the
"regional administrators."
The tentative agreement, a copy of which is
in the possession of The Hindu , avoids any
reference to either a unitary or federal
model. It does not even touch the
much-debated "Indian model." Instead,
it says that under the "power-sharing"
arrangement, the role of the Central
Government should be confined to subjects
such as defence and security, foreign
affairs, finance, elections, national
planning and shipping.
The relevant paragraph reads:
"The basic assumption
underlying an equitable framework for
power-sharing is that the Central
Government would be invested with all
the powers, functions and
responsibilities essential for the
effective conduct of the national policy
in all fields [principally including,
but not limited to defence and security,
foreign relations, the national budget,
monetary policy, elections, immigration
and emigration, national planning,
shipping and navigation and related
matters], while other matters will fall
within the purview of regional
administrators."
It says particular
attention should be paid to fiscal
considerations. Also, the regional
administrators should have access to
adequate resources for effectively
discharging their duties.
The document says that the cornerstone of
the political solution is power-sharing on
the basis acceptable to the Sinhala, Tamil
and Muslim communities and reflecting the
experience in the past five decades.
