| 
			 INDICTMENT AGAINST SRI LANKA 
	Censorship, Disinformation & Murder of Journalists  
Sri Lanka Diplomat & Truth 
 P. Sampanthar 
Singapore, 4 November 2000 
It is an old adage that diplomats 
are honest men sent abroad to lie for their country. Recently (on 2 November 
2000), Mr.P.M.Amza, the First Secretary, Sri Lanka High Commission wrote to the 
Straits Times in Singapore, about its editorial on Sri Lanka. In fairness to 
Mr.Amza, I give below the full text of his letter, titled 'Wrong impression 
created of Sri Lanka' together with my own comments: 
" I refer to the editorial entitled 
"Uncertainty in Colombo'' (ST, Oct 25). 
While the editorial analysed the political 
scene in Sri Lanka in a post-election setting, I wish to point out certain 
references which, we feel, created a wrong impression in the minds of readers. 
There is a reference to Mrs Sirimavo 
Bandaranaike, our former Prime Minister, who, the article states, was 
responsible for the introduction of Sinhala and what followed was Sri Lanka's 
long descent into self-destruction. 
The Official Languages Act was introduced in 
1956, before Mrs Bandaranaike was elected to office, in 1960. 
  
  
    
      | Comment: Here, Mr.Hamza is somewhat economical with truth. He 
		fails to mention that the  
		Sinhala Only Act
         was introduced by Mrs.Srimavo Bandaranaike's husband, Mr.S.W.R.D. 
		Bandaranaike; and that on her husbands death in 1959,  
		Mrs.Bandaranaike campaigned and won the 1960 election on the basis of 
		'following her husband's policies'. | 
     
   
  
 
On the question of language, however, one may 
note that the Tamil Language Special Provision Act No 28 of 1958 provided for 
the use of the Tamil language as a medium of instruction in education, in any 
official correspondence for prescribed purposes in the North and East Province, 
and for examinations for entry to the public service. 
  
  
    
      | Comment: The truth is that the Bandaranaike government directed 
		that unless a Tamil public servant passed a proficiency test in Sinhala, 
		his annual increment would be suspended and he would eventually be 
		dismissed. Surely, Mr.Hamza 
		will know of the case of Mr.Kodiswaran, whose  increment was stayed  
		because he declined to sit for the Sinhala proficiency test. Kodiswaran 
		later sued the government on the ground that Language Regulations and 
		the Sinhala Only Act violated the anti discriminatory provisions of 
		section 29 of the Sri Lanka Constitution. Mrs.Bandaranaike responded by 
		abolishing appeals to the Privy Council and enacting a new Constitution 
		which removed section 29 altogether! | 
     
   
  
 
The present Constitution recognises both 
Sinhala and Tamil as official languages and English as a link language. 
  
  
    
      | Comment: Though both Sinhala and Tamil are 'official' 
		languages, they do not have parity of status. Sinhala children are 
		taught in the Sinhala medium and Tamil children in the Tamil medium. In 
		practical terms, in the government service and for employment, Sinhala 
		is the dominant language and the rule of the permanent Sinhala majority 
		continues unabated. | 
     
   
  
 
On the question of "harassment against the 
Tamil minority'', I wish to draw the attention of readers to the fact that the 
Tamil Tiger Movement took a violent turn in the early 1980s.  
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) 
has been designated as a ruthless terrorist movement by the US State Department. 
It is also a proscribed movement in the United States, Malaysia, India and Sri 
Lanka. 
  
  
    
      | Comment: It is true that the LTTE has been designated a 
		terrorist organisation by the US State Department. But, the US Courts 
		have said that they are unable to rule on the question whether that 
		designation is justified on the facts. Also, Mr.Hamza should have made 
		it clear that India has not categorised the LTTE as a terrorist 
		organisation. 
		India has 
		proscribed the LTTE on the ground that the demand for an independent 
		Tamil state will threaten the territorial integrity of India. | 
     
   
  
 
The policy followed by successive governments 
has been to try to negotiate a political solution to the ethnic issue as 
violence is not a means to an end -- whatever the cause." 
  
  
    
      | Comment: Mr.Hamza must know that the truth is otherwise. He 
		must know of the political reality 
		which US Professor Marshall Singer commented upon in 1995:
         "One of the essential elements that must
      	be kept in mind in understanding the Sri Lankan ethnic conflict is that, 
		since 1958 at least, every time Tamil politicians negotiated some sort 
		of power-sharing deal with a Sinhalese government - regardless of which 
		party was in power - the opposition Sinhalese party always claimed that 
		the party in power had negotiated away too much. In almost every case - 
		sometimes within days - the party in power backed down on the 
		agreement."  
        Mr.Hamza will help to resolve the conflict if he first 
		admits that the real culprit is a 
		Sinhala Buddhist fundamentalism which has asserted (and continues to 
		assert) that Sri Lanka is the land of the Sinhala Buddhists - and it is 
		this which has 
		compelled the Tamils to resort to arms to defend themselves.  | 
     
   
  
 
  |