federalidea.com

by Prof. Wiswa Warnapala

It is indeed a pleasure to be here on the occasion of the opening of the Pre-Clinical Building of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Kelaniya. This building, as the Vice Chancellor mentioned, represents yet another stage of the expansion of the Faculty of Medicine, and the aim is to increase the annual intake which, at present stands at 160. This building, which we ceremonially opened today, is to house the traditional pre-clinical departments; pre-clinical subjects, I am told, are taught in the first two years in the MBBS course, in addition, a language unit is to be set up to provide the required language skills for the undergraduates so that they can communicate with all types of patients. The entire cost of the project was in the region of Rs.178 million, and it was funded by the government.

[at the University of Kelaniya-file pic by sandunruki]

It is therefore relevant and appropriate at this stage to divert the attention of this distinguished academic audience to issues of both Medical and University education in the country. Since the establishment of the fully-fledged independent and autonomous University in 1942, the University system which, initially based on the traditional Oxbridge formula, had undergone a change in the last fifty years. Though the system of University education expanded in response to various popular pressures and issues based on a social demand model of education, there was no comprehensive policy strategy covering the entire higher education policy. Instead of adopting a common policy strategy based on the country’s development needs, ad hoc changes were made, resulting in the creation of several imbalances within the system of University education in Sri Lanka.

Though the formal University system began in 1921 with the establishment of the University College, professional medical education began in 1870 with the creation of the Ceylon Medical College, and it remained an institution under the Government Department of Health. It was in the same period that the Law College came into existence as another prestigious professional body. The Ceylon Medical College was able to create a small professional elite, and it was in line with the colonial policy of the period. The Ceylon Medical College, as one of the important institutions of professional education, contributed substantially to the development of University education and its absorption into the University system was such that it dominated Medical education in the country till the establishment of the Second Medical Faculty in 1961. The Ceylon Medical College and subsequently, the Faculty of Medicine dominated professional medical education for nearly a century, and this dominance came to be broken with the establishment of new Medical Faculties associated with the Universities which, in other words, meant that it followed the expansion of the Universities.

The Peradeniya Faculty was established in 1961, Sri Jayawardenepura Faculty in 1993, Kelaniya Faculty in 1995, Jaffna Faculty in 1978, Ruhuna Faculty in 1984, Eastern University Faculty in 2004 and the Rajarata Faculty in 2006. Today, there are eight Medical Faculties, providing medical education to 6025 students. In 2006, we selected 1111 students to the Medical Faculties and the number proposed on the basis of the A/L results of 2007 is 1155. The number of eligible candidates of the relevant subject area stood at 15,718, out of which only 7909 applied and the number selected was 4343. As you know, there is a massive demand for higher educational opportunities in the country and we have taken measures to expand the access; all parents, specially those in the middle class, prefer to provide a medical education to their children and the occupational mobility in the country is integrally associated with this perception. Because of this perception, there is a consistent demand for the expansion of medical education in the country.

Certain professional fields have been given University status with a view to diversifying the system of Medical education in the country, and the new Faculty of Allied Health Sciences is the newest example of this kind of diversification. Nursing education is to be given the University status, and initially, the University of Peradeniya and University of Jayawardenepura would undertake to absorb the existing Nurses’ Training Colleges with a view to providing the nurses with a professional degree and this is certain to enhance the quality of nursing education in the country.

Since the system consists of 15 Universities, there is this view that every University should establish a Faculty of Medicine, and this is primarily because of the fact that a large number of our students go abroad, seeking a medical qualification. Here, in this context that I would like to refer to two categories; there are established Medical Colleges which have been recognised by the Sri Lanka Medical Council and the second category includes schools which are sub-standard and they have not been recognised by the Sri Lanka Medical Council.

The Sri Lanka Medical Council has raised a number of pertinent issues relating to medical education in the country and the Ministry of Higher Education, taking into consideration its concerns, does not wish to establish Medical Faculties in the other Universities in the near future before the existing faculties are upgraded with the required facilities, especially their basic infrastructure. Though there is a need to accommodate the increasing number of Advanced Level qualified students, the functioning Faculties of Medicine, in my view, cannot expand the intake without compromising the standards of patient care and the doctor-patient relationship. For Medical sciences to be taught efficiently, well equipped laboratory facilities are necessary and they cannot be provided within a few months.

The Medical Faculty at the University of Rajarata, though it took a batch of 180 students, is still not properly equipped and there is a shortage of teachers. No good teachers can be attracted to a place like Rajarata; these difficulties which any institution is likely to face in the initial phase but they need to be overcome in order to provide the students with better system of education, and this is of special importance to professional medical education. The Sri Lanka Medical Council, as the organisation engaged in the maintenance of professional standards, has informed the Ministry of Higher Education that appropriate measures are necessary to protect the public from unqualified, poorly qualified and inadequately trained professionals in the field of medical education. We are conscious of such observations and I, therefore, can assure this audience that we do not intend to establish new Universities as well as new Faculties of Medicine in the near future but in terms of policy, we have recognised the need for expansion of medical education in the country. In planning our policy in respect of medical education, we proposed to consult both the Ministry of Health and the Sri Lanka Medical Council on matters pertaining to the establishment of a new Faculty of Medicine. In my view, this kind of consultation and relationship will help to overcome some of the problems and issues relating to the running of the Faculties.

It has been the policy of the Ministry of Higher Education to provide opportunities for the expansion of the post-graduate studies in all disciplines; in my view, post- graduate sector was neglected in the past as the policy makers always emphasised the need for expansion of under-graduate studies. The dearth of teaching personnel in the Medical Faculties could be tackled by expanding the number of courses in the Post-Graduate Institute of Medicine. A proper programme of expansion could address the dearth of specialists in pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects; more post-graduate students are necessary in such areas as Anatomy, Physiology, Bio-Chemistry and Pharmacology to meet the demand of Universities.

It is true that the post-graduate institutions are not properly monitored and they are not properly funded, and the ministry, through the University Grants Commission, proposes to supervise the post-graduate institutions in order to see that they become active partners in the development process. Yet another problem associated with the medical profession is the number of students going on scholarships to different countries. Since there is an ever-increasing demand for medical education, certain countries offer scholarships, and it is through this method that they attract students as private students. The Ministry of Higher Education awards a scholarship only after ascertaining whether the particular institution has been recognised by the Sri Lanka Medical Council and the ministry proposes to establish some kind of a mechanism with the assistance of the UGC to verify the credentials of the institutions, which provide medical education. This kind of control, though difficult a system to be adopted in the given global context, would help us to maintain standards and obtain professionals of accepted quality. As far as this matter is concerned, I tend to agree with the views expressed by the Sri Lanka Medical Council.

It is here in this context that I need to turn your attention to the main goals in the sphere of Higher Education. Today, the country is expected to give priority to accelerate growth, reduce poverty, achieve Millennium Development Goals and create a highly skilled workforce. In the context of the global economy, based primarily on the knowledge economy, higher literacy rates are not enough; take for instance, Karnataka State in India, its literacy rate is 54.5 percent but it remains one of the developed states in India. What I am trying to drive at is that higher education is an indispensable tool for achieving national goals. We need to move in the direction of a knowledge economy so that the country can build an educated workforce which will help all citizens to uplift their economic status. In order to achieve this, Sri Lanka, at this time, needs a development-oriented Higher Education Policy through which we can upgrade the quality and relevance of education offered by the Universities of Sri Lanka.

One has to acknowledge the fact that it is through Higher Education that goals of social equity and economic and social development could be achieved in any country as higher education’s primary role is to develop the intellectual and skills capabilities of our society. Such capabilities are necessary to address and resolve the range of problems and challenges faced by the Sri Lankan society. Higher Education must also play a central role in meeting the realities of international competition under the new conditions of globalization, and it is in this context that we need to devise a comprehensive policy on Higher Education with the sole purpose of enhancing the quality and relevance of higher education, and it is only on the basis of change that the country can convert the Sri Lankan Universities into centres of learning and active partners of development in the country. It is on this basis that we can build a new development framework that can support knowledge-driven economic growth, and it, in addition, requires an expanded and inclusive higher education system which can reach larger segments of the population. We intend to formulate a new Higher Education Policy on the basis of such vital considerations relevant and useful in the given context, both local and international.

I thank you for giving me an opportunity to share some of my views with this distinguished academic audience.

(A text of a speech delivered by Professor WISWA WARNAPALA, Minister of Higher Education at the Opening of the Pre-Clinical Building at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya at Ragama on 14th February 2008.)

by S. Ratnajeevan Hoole

Sri Lankan Ambassador Bernard Goonetilleke has put a good but inaccurate face on the Sri Lankan Sinhalese majority’s conflict with the Tamil minority.

First, he says weighting examinations was never intended to discriminate against us Tamils. I took the common Advanced Level exam in 1969 and was admitted to the engineering faculty.

The government then redid the admissions after adding some 28 marks to the four-subject aggregate of Sinhalese students.

I lost my seat. They effectively claimed that the son of a Sinhalese minister in an elite Colombo school was disadvantaged vis-a-vis a Tamil tea-plucker’s son. Unable to defend this, in 1973 they created the statistical scheme equating Tamil and Sinhalese averages with regional preferences to which the ambassador refers.

Tamils were still shut out.

Second, Sri Lankan democracy: The ambassador is justly proud of Sinhalese democracy with universal adult franchise since 1931. However, promptly upon independence, half the Tamils those in the tea plantations were denied citizenship.

The rest of us Tamils began losing our franchise in 1981, when the government rigged the District Council elections, ironically meant to devolve power to us.

By 1983, our parliamentarians, set upon by government hoodlums, fled to India. The vacuum was filled by the virulent Tamil Tigers. They claim to be our sole representative, forcibly recruit our children and murder those standing for election without their blessings.

They have massacred innocent Muslim and Sinhalese villagers. Cornered by the Indian peacekeeping force from 1987 to 1990, they got a new lease on life when the Sri Lankan government accommodated them in five-star hotels and armed them.

His excellency laments the loss of our rights without acknowledging his government’s hand.

Zeal for denying democracy for Tamils is evident as it promotes a breakaway faction of the Tigers fielding candidates for elections while recruiting children, bearing arms and terrorizing Tamils the very methods of the Tigers that the government excoriates.

Finally, there is the suggestion that Tamils prefer living under the government to living in Tiger territory: I for one loved living in the Tamil neighborhoods where I grew up. But my ancestral house was destroyed, and innocent locals disappeared.

Tamil shopkeepers visited by soldiers for cigarettes and public servants have been murdered by the Tigers. Few dare live there in these circumstances.

Sri Lanka’s real story is the more complex oedipal unfolding of inexorable Sinhalese nationalist communalism meeting its ugly little baby, Tamil fascism. We ordinary Tamils struggle under the two.

(This article appeared under the heading “The Sri Lankan story” in The Washington Times of Feb. 24, 2008 in response to the article by Bernard Goonetilleke (Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Washington DC) in The Washington Times dated Feb. 17, 2008: The author was appointed Vice Chancellor of University of Jaffna Sri Lanka and fled after receiving death threats from the TamilTigers. He has also been assaulted by the Sri Lankan Police.He is presently attached toGoodwin College, Drexel University, Philadelphia)

by Bernard Goonetilleke

The conflict in Sri Lanka is inextricably linked with the demand for secession, deceptively designed to wrench the sympathy of the international community. Last month, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), urged the United Nations to recognize “Tamil sovereignty” and end the conflict in Sri Lanka.

The international community must be told that, beneath a plausible veneer, the demand for a separate state for Tamils of Sri Lanka is rooted in fiction. There never was at any time in Sri Lankan history “a traditional Tamil homeland” in the north and east of Sri Lanka, as claimed by the LTTE.

If historically, the LTTE demand for a separate state is a downright fabrication, what is the case they can make to justify a separate state? The claim of discrimination is made in relation to language, standardization in education, justice, etc., for Tamils.

Standardization or statistical weighting was designed to help disadvantaged students from rural districts irrespective of their race and was never designed to discriminate against Tamils. Such positive discrimination exists in other countries too, to grant relief to the underprivileged.

Thus, rural Tamils along with others, benefited from standardization, which is not what the Tigers would have you believe. Consequently, the urban students, with access to better educational facilities, were disadvantaged through standardization, among whom were Sinhalese and Tamils.

Sinhala and Tamil are official languages today and English is a link language. One cannot fault the administration, which came to office in 1956 with an election pledge to make Sinhala, spoken by nearly 70 percent of the population, the official language. The mistake, one can argue, was not to have the foresight to recognize Tamil as an official language as well. Remember, in 1950, the Indian Constitution declared Hindi the official language of the union and think of the ethnic diversity of India.

If anyone says that Tamils cannot seek justice through courts, it is a downright fabrication. Take the landmark Supreme Court judgment in June 2007 on eviction of Tamil lodgers from Colombo. Many are the examples in which Tamils have vindicated their rights guaranteed under the constitution. Other examples are the case of Ramupillai v. Ministry of Public Administration (1991) and Vinyagamoorthy v. Army Commander (1997).

True, the majority of today’s Sinhala community comprising 74.5 percent, is Buddhist. However, the multiethnic, multireligious tapestry of Sri Lankan society, older than 2,500 years, has been enriched by the threads of racial amity and tolerance. The Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, Burghers, Malays and others share a strong sense of harmony unique to Sri Lanka.

Furthermore, even though the LTTE is attempting to establish a mono-ethnic separate state for about 12 percent of “Sri Lankan Tamils” in the north and east, (”Indian Tamils” comprising 4.6 percent of the population are part of our democratic fabric), more than half of that population now lives in safety and peace among the Sinhalese and other communities in the south.

If Tamils are being discriminated against as alleged, why would they prefer to live among the Sinhalese than under the LTTE?

Last month, an FBI announcement said “No, it’s not al Qaeda or Hezbollah or even Hamas…. The Tamil Tigers are among the most dangerous and deadly extremists in the world.”

No one knows this claim better than Sri Lankans, Tamils included, which is why the government is continuing military operations against Tigers, to free the people and wrest the land away from this terrorist group. President Mahinda Rajapaksa has consistently said the answer to the conflict will be a negotiated political solution that is fair to all communities. The dilemma is with whom is he going to negotiate? Can it be the LTTE, “the most dangerous and deadly extremists in the world,” for the seventh time since 1985?

Sri Lanka is one of the oldest democracies in South Asia, and despite the relentless onslaught of terror unleashed by Tigers, democracy still survives in our island. While the United States pursues new horizons to nurture democracy, it needs to be alert to the anti-democratic forces that stalk vulnerable democracies like Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka has no Pledge of Allegiance to its flag. If it had one, it would be no different than that of the United States: “One nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” The United States needs to afford Sri Lanka the strength to remain “one nation indivisible.”

(Bernard Goonetilleke is a former head of the peace secretariat and the ambassador of Sri Lanka to the United States.This article appeared in “The Washington Times” of Feb 17th 2008 under the heading “Tamil Homeland Fantasy”. A response to this article by Prof. Ratnajeevan Hoole is published in the Washington Times of Feb 24th 2008).

by Robert Muggah

As civilian deaths in the civil war climb quickly, the government shows no appetite for peace

Sri Lanka is quietly sliding into a humanitarian nightmare. Since the election of the nationalist government of Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2005 and the resumption of war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) late last year, the number of civilian deaths has jumped sharply. In the past six weeks, more than 180 Tamil, Muslim and Sinhalese citizens have been killed, many with bullets through their temples. Reprisal targeting of Sinhalese – usually by way of explosives–is on the rise.

The international donor community is at a loss as to what to do. A Norwegian-brokered ceasefire in early 2002 was expected to usher in a new era of peace after decades of civil war. The United States, Japan, the European Union (EU) and others rapidly introduced carrots and sticks to encourage a serious devolution of power and alleviate suffering. In the wake of the devastating tsunami in late 2004, it was widely hoped that a spirit of reconciliation might emerge from a legacy of tragedy. But these efforts were spectacular failures.

The present government displays little appetite for peace. Much like previous administrations led by Jayawardane, Premadasa or Kumaratunga, Rajapaksa claims that a military solution to the LTTE question is within his grasp. The current government differs in one important respect: It has dropped all pretense to negotiate a political settlement.

When it refused more than $4 billion (U.S.) in conditional aid in favour of war, donors feared they had overplayed their hand. And despite a procession of U.S., Japanese, Norwegian, Canadian and Indian diplomats flying to the capital, Colombo, to address the suffering of civilians, the government refused to implement even cosmetic changes to enhance due process or redress.

The efforts of South Asia’s regional power, India, have yielded comparatively little to stem Sri Lanka’s slide into violence. Although India has long played a Janus-faced role in Sri Lanka, it is alarmed by the contagion effects of the long-running war. The UN Refugee Agency estimates that more than 20,000 Sri Lankan Tamil refugees are languishing in southern India and thousands more have sought safe haven since the resumption of war. While this has irritated India’s own sizable Tamil population, the Sri Lankan government’s repressive tactics risk triggering militarization in refugee camps and at home.

If the current military strategy does not change course, the Sri Lankan war will likely continue without end. As the daily challenges facing NATO coalition forces in Afghanistan show, while battles may be won, wars are just as easily lost. Sri Lanka’s government does not appear to have learned this lesson. Civilians are paying the price of this war, as direct casualties in the north and east and as the “new poor” due to spiralling inflation and unemployment in the south.

Because the next round of presidential elections is not until April 2010 and the war remains popular with the Sinhalese majority, it is unlikely that the violence will decline in the near term. The government is so heavily invested in the logic of war that any reversal may lose it future votes. Paradoxically, cries of indignation from outsiders, and even from the domestic human rights lobby, may actually strengthen the government’s hand.

The outside world is watching with a sense of deja vu. The war has claimed more than 75,000 lives since the early 1980s, and more than 1 million people have been internally displaced. While horrified by the scale of killing, international donors are exhausted and more inclined to withdraw than pursue strategic engagement. Meanwhile, the domestic opposition is scattered, terrified of being spirited away in the ubiquitous white vans that troll the streets. Short of a spectacular reversal in the military fortunes of either side or a major economic crisis, the situation will likely simmer on.

While the international community should avoid aggravating the situation, there are at least four ways it could potentially keep Sri Lanka from collapsing entirely.

First, cautious diplomatic pressure must continuously be applied in order to convince the government and the LTTE that a military solution is not viable. The international community should recall that it supported the proscription of the LTTE as a “terrorist organization” several years ago. If Western and Eastern governments are to stimulate dialogue, they will need to be sensitive to both parties’ positions and their own role.

Second, if rebuffed, the U.S. and the EU could consider withdrawing the country from the General System of Preferences, which applies reduced taxes and levies to certain Sri Lankan exports, such as tea and textiles. Such a tactic would signal disapproval of the country’s state of governance and could reduce its capacity to wage war.

Third, because there are no international observers to monitor human rights in Sri Lanka, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon could appoint a special envoy to the country. An envoy could begin documenting the scale of armed violence, which is currently under-reported owing to fear, attacks on reporters and self-censorship.

Fourth, given regional implications or even little-used article 99 of the UN Charter, the UN Security Council should be encouraged to take up the issue. On the recommendation of a special envoy, the council can identify political and economic sanctions to bring the parties back to the negotiating table. Perhaps most important, such measures could potentially restrict arms imports to the country.

The human costs are almost certainly set to rise in the coming months. A massive military offensive is being planned that will lead to more deaths and more displacement. Without concerted engagement, the situation will worsen further still. [Courtesy: Toronto Star]

Robert Muggah is research director of the Small Arms Survey in Geneva and is the author of Relocation Failures: A Short History of Internal Displacement and Resettlement in Sri Lanka (forthcoming).

By Kusal Perera

Kosovo not only divided Serbia into two independent States, it also divided the world into two differing blocs. One that supports cessation and the other that does not. The major power blocs in the West had consented to accept Kosovo as an independent state even before it made the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) on 17th February. The USA was thanked by thousands of Kosovans who came on to the streets of Pristina for giving them an independent country. Yet it was a difficult acceptance for all of those big powers. Bush therefore qualified their stand by saying cessation of Kosovo and accepting it, would not be made a precedent. For most who opposed, there were ample reasons to do so. Russia is pained with separation and still fights against more cessations. China has not given up on Taiwan. Spain has Basque wanting to secede. India has at least Kashmir fighting a liberation struggle. Pakistan has Baluchistan rebelling for freedom. Cyprus torn in two is still sore. So is our own Sri Lanka, waging a war that claims to keep the country as a Unitary State.

[Kosovars celebrated in central Pristina, Kosovo, on the night of Sat Feb 16th-ahead of the region’s declaration of independence from Serbia, expected to come on Sunday-Photo Courtesy of NYTimes.com]

The Sri Lankan government cannot therefore felicitate Kosovans over their liberation and would be left in a tight patch, if Palestinians liberate to establish their own State too. Yet the Sinhala South that expects the war to deliver a unitary State for them, needs to learn a few lessons from the Kosovo issue, what ever this government says about wining the war and annihilating the LTTE. A few words about the war and negotiations with all stakeholders to the conflict as per “Mahinda Chintanaya” to begin with would indicate where this country is being led right now. In the Sinhala version of the Mahinda Chinthana booklet, Presidential candidate Rajapaksa promises to conclude all negotiations within 03 months from assuming office (page / 29) as Executive President. A pledge there would be no war in this country, there after from March 2006. Having assumed office in November 2005, the war was dragged on for two years for now without any semblance of negotiations, but with promises thrown in between by different personalities of high authority on winning the war. Once it was before end 2007 and then before Sinhala New Year 2008. There was the promise of eliminating 10 Tigers every day to finish the war by June this year. The crowning glory to all these promises came from the President himself about a fortnight ago when he told the Indian media he would need “about an year, or may be one and a half years” to finish the war. That would keep this country bleeding in agony at least till mid 2009. And then who knows for how long there after ?

But that had been the war with every government, starting with President JRJ who wanted General Weeratunge to report back to him after finishing off the Tamil insurgents by end December 1979. That is not all about waging war against an insurgency that has a political reason for its brutal presence. It’s all about the Kosovo Albanians gaining independence with a separate State, for SL to learn a lesson or two.

Kosovo Province with 90 percent Muslim Albanians since the Turks ran over all that Balkan land from 1389 stretching up to the doors of Vienna and established the Ottoman rule for over five centuries, enjoyed a fair degree of autonomy since 1963 within the Yugoslav Republic under President Josip Bros Tito. President Tito was a Socialist maverick who opposed Stalin, allowed religious freedom and schemed a different social system that allowed for profit sharing within a state controlled economy. Tito believed in defusing tensions through loosening state controls and the Yugoslav Republic underwent another major constitutional reform in 1974 that gave education, health and housing to the autonomous regions and provinces and Kosovo gained self – government in many areas of social life including police and the judiciary.

Like most Eastern European States with the Yugoslav Republic running into dissenting politics in the decade of 80, Serb nationalism was a rallying call in Belgrade that paved the way for Slobodan Milosevic to rise to power. This on the other hand catalysed Kosovo Albanian sentiments and in 1981, a student protest broke out in six of the major Kosovan cities with a call for a “Kosovo Republic within Yugoslavia”. The protests were brutally suppressed by Belgrade and thus began the organised Kosovo Albanian nationalist movement with a political agenda. The Kosovo Albanian nationalism gained further legitimacy with Milosevic ascending to power in Serbia in late 1987.

The last straw on the camel’s back was the Serbian referendum in 1989 that allowed curbing of autonomous powers in the provinces of Kosovo and Vojvodina. Most national minorities and Kosovo Albanians boycotted the referendum. Milosevic’s government was accused of rigging the elections, controlling of media and abuse of human rights. Constitutional reforms that had to be ratified by the provincial governments were done so with tanks and armoured cars lined in front of provincial assemblies. The constitutional reforms thus affected gave the Serbian government of Milosevic, total control over police, the judiciary, economy, language policy and the education system, previously enjoyed by the provincial governments.

The results were obvious. Initial non violent protests led by Kosovo Albanian populist Dr. Ibrahim Rugova failed to resolve the Kosovo conflict. Instead they swelled the presence of Serbo-Yugoslav military and police in Kosovo. The rest is history of ethnic cleansing. Over 100,000 Albanians within the Kosovo province were sacked from state enterprises by the Serbian government. The provincial media was shut down and the Pristina University closed. In 1995, Croatian Serbs were settled in Kosovo in an attempt to change the ethnic balance within Kosovo. With non violent politics of Rugova unable to deliver justice to Kosovo Albanians, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) came into existence in 1996 and the struggle to establish an independent Kosovo took a violent turn. With Milosevic’s government choosing war, Albanian villages in Kosovo were looted and burnt down. Whole villages were displaced and thousands of ethnic Albanians sought refuge in neighbouring Albania, Macedonia and Montenegro. Fleeing ethnic Albanians were killed and dumped in mass graves. In return, Serbs in Kosovo had to flee to Serbia.

The entry of NATO, the formation of UNMIK and the facilitation of stability and peace within the Kosovo province under UNMIK since 1999, were all results thereof. The NATO took 78 days of heavy bombing to compel Milosevic’s government to agree to withdraw all its military and police from Kosovo. The UN Security Council Resolution 1244 accepted Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo but the majority of the Kosovo Albanians refused to accept Serbian rule. This compelled the UN to facilitate negotiations between Serbia and KLA on the “status of Kosovo”. UN backed negotiations began in February, exactly two years ago.

Lessons to learn are not very complicated. One, even 02 mn people would not accept ethnic or religious ideology based centralised rule over them. Two, military interventions in controlling nationalist aspirations leads to violent protests that over time changes into armed conflict that we prefer to call “terrorism”. Three, hyped State nationalism can not compensate a protracted war, breaking down of social stability, economic devastation and criminalising of social forces. Four, what we label as “terrorism” that emerges out of political suppression can not be suppressed militarily and negotiations to end that terrorism have to be with those terrorists themselves. In short, war is no answer to a politically triggered conflict although it turns into an armed conflict due to authoritarian and sectarian politics of a governing party.

This basic fact was perhaps understood by the post Milosevic Serbian government that negotiated the status of Kosovo with the KLA leadership, although it had to accommodate Serb sentiments. There was no room left any more to compromise on the old autonomous rule that was given by the Yugoslavian State under Josip Bros Tito. It now had to be something more than what was there thirty years ago. This left the Serbian government of Vojislav Kostunica to choose between another war and an independent Kosovo. He chose the latter by protesting, instead of going back to war even with the backing of the Russian super power.

What is important to us is the strategy that was developed by the KLA which was classified a “terrorist organisation” by the CIA, the USA and the UN. The BBC’s Correspondent in the Balkans, Paul Wood wrote in March 2001 that “the Kosovo Liberation Army became the most successful guerrilla movement of modern times”. They had proved to the international community the Serbian authorities are not only violating human rights within a genocidal war, they would not accommodate the Kosovo Albanian aspirations within a democratic power sharing system. That Kosovo Albanians have no alternative but to be independent from Serbian hegemony to achieve peace for both societies. It is therefore worth reading how the Sri Lankan situation would evolve with Indian backing that may not be enough to plug leaks of robust Southern hegemony. One that avoids accommodating Tamil aspirations with actual power sharing, substituted instead by war for another one and a half years to satisfy Southern sentiments within an economy that holds no promise even for the Sinhala majority.

By Dr. S. Narapalasingam

Like many deceptive phrases, ‘national integration’ and ‘nation building’ uttered by some political leaders in Sri Lanka at critical times have no practical meaning. For nation building, the entire population must first regard themselves as equal citizens of one country. 60 years of independence have been wasted in internal power struggles losing in the process even the common identity and mutual respect, trust and bond the people of all races had earlier. The gullible people believed their political leaders were really committed to the unity, national development (country-wide) and welfare of all citizens. The contradictions between the declared aims and practices of governments increased with the intense competition for power. It was a case of winning political influence and self-serving power by whatever means. The larger interest of the entire ‘nation’ comprising people in all ethnic communities gave way to parochial interests. Recently, the contradictions even in officially declared aims became evident within few days. The APRC process is one glaring case of shifting aims.

Exploitation of ethnic differences

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband in his message issued on the occasion of Sri Lanka’s 60th anniversary of Independence said: “People in Sri Lanka need to find space to realize their many similarities, rather than becoming further polarized by their differences”. The latter was a process that started five decades ago when the differences were exploited by political leaders for gaining power ignoring the damage inflicted to the nascent nation-state. The break-up began in 1956 with the adoption of ‘Sinhala only’ as the official language of the multi-ethnic State. It was Dr. Colvin R. de Silva of the LSSP who warned-one language two nations; two languages one nation. The idea of a separate Tamil Nation in Sri Lanka gained strength since then following various discriminatory practices pursued by governments that made the ethnic Tamils second class citizens.

The present constitution has not only exacerbated the divisions in the Society but also failed to safeguard human rights, democracy, rule of law and good governance. It has created a new class of people seeking the power that they know could easily be exploited for achieving their own political or personal aims. This also meant the exploitation of the democratic political system, especially for the benefit of the privileged class.

The political culture that evolved with the constitutional and related changes since 1972 is devoid of the principles of unity in diversity, equal rights, justice and protection for all citizens and total obedience of all citizens, including the powerful leaders to the rule of law. A written constitution would not have assumed great importance, if these principles were ingrained in the political culture. The Society has to take much of the blame for allowing the egoistic power-seeking few to decide its and the country’s future. The spread of the disturbing violent culture is now visible in all sections of the Society from the university students to the lawmakers; a few are widely known to be habitual lawbreakers. The rebellions in the North and South since 1971 have largely contributed to this deplorable change. It is the failure of the political leadership to take advanced action for meeting the needs of the vulnerable sections of the society that led to the uprisings.

1972 constitution

Two schools of thought have largely influenced the make-up of the 1972 constitution. This was due to the SLFP-LSSP-CP coalition government formed in 1970 following the massive victory of the alliance in the general election. The leftists wanted to get rid of any remnants of colonial rule and the desires of the departing masters. The 1948 Soulbury Constitution was considered to reflect their idea of independent Ceylon. In the opinion of the Trotskyite and Marxist leaders, it did not embrace their socialist beliefs and the supreme power of the people. The SLFP the main coalition partner under Mrs. Srimavo Bandaranaike wanted to be seen as the champion of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism. This resulted in two conflicting positions because of the need to accord supremacy to the ethnic Sinhalese and, of course, to Buddhism the religion of the majority of the Sinhalese and incorporate socialist beliefs which had nothing in common with ethno-nationalism in a plural society with members of different ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds. It was not the SLFP but the leftist parties that had to compromise their notion of one united multi-ethnic State where all citizens (the working class for the socialists) have equal rights and opportunities to prosper. The following changes introduced in the new constitution are significant to judge the gravity and the nature of damage done to the concept of one united democratic socialist (multi-ethnic) State.

(i) Section 29 (2) in the Soulbury Constitution that provided some safeguard against discrimination of ethnic minorities was abandoned. This stated: “No law shall (a) prohibit or restrict the free exercise of any religion, or (b) make persons of any community or religion liable to disabilities to which other communities or religions are not made liable, or (c) confer on persons of any community or religion any privilege or advantage which is not conferred on persons of other communities or religions, or (d) alter the constitution of any religious body except with the consent of the governing authority of that body.” Had there been a similar provision in the new constitution, the standardization of university entrance examination marks that deprived entry to many qualified Tamil students would not have been possible. The same applies to general restrictions on civil liberties of Tamils. The 1976 Vaddukkoddai resolution was enthusiastically welcomed by the dismayed Tamil youth. The rebel LTTE leader was one of the boys who got inspiration from this resolution to fight for separation. At that time Senator Tiruchelvam questioned the wisdom of adopting the resolution. The distress and anger of the youth prevailed.

(ii) The Soulbury Constitution did not accord any special status to Buddhism, the religion of the majority of Sinhalese. Chapter II (Section 6) of the 1972 Constitution stated: “The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster Buddhism while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Section 8(1)(d).”This said: “Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” The special status given to Buddhism had solely a political motive as there was no threat from any quarter for the State to protect and foster it.

(iii) The Senate, the second chamber that existed for examining from different perspectives the legislations approved by the Parliament was abolished. Under the new arrangement, a Bill passed by the Parliament becomes law when the Speaker signs a certificate that it has been duly passed. In certain circumstances before a Bill was passed into law, the Constitutional Court could advise the Speaker if the Bill or any provision in it was inconsistent with the Constitution. In such cases the Bill could become law only if suitable amendments were made and passed by the House with two-third majority. It is important to note no Bill passed by the Parliament and certified by the Speaker came within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. Likewise, many checks and balances that existed earlier were removed with the adoption of the 1972 Republican Constitution. These were mistakenly taken as restriction of the freedom of the sovereign State or the rights of the sovereign people, when in fact these were really meant to prevent abuse of powers and safeguard the independence of the judiciary. These were also intended to prevent excessive political interference in maintaining law and order and good governance. The administrative system underwent major change with the responsibility for appointments and promotions in the public service left to the respective ministers. The notorious ‘chit system’ that existed for some time in the 1970s for appointments at low levels in government was possible with this drastic change in administrative practices.

(iv) The new constitution reinforced the status of Sinhala language as the only official language of the country by transforming the law passed in 1956 into constitutional provision. With regard to the ‘reasonable use of Tamil’, the constitution specified that any regulations made under the existing law for the use of Tamil language “shall not in any manner be interpreted as being a provision of the Constitution but shall be deemed to be a subordinate legislation”.

(v) The Soulbury Constitution did not have the unitary label, although structurally it was unitary. The 1972 constitution was labeled unitary, emphasizing the Sinhala majority rule. All decisions concerning the safety, security, education, economic well-being and future of the ethnic minorities were left to the domain of the ethnic Sinhala majority. The word ‘unitary’ has now acquired extra special significance to Sinhala nationalists with the revival of the old Sinhala nationalist sentiments, as before for instant political advantage. This has now made the resolution of the ethnic conflict increasingly difficult.

There is some similarity between the explanations given by Dr. Colvin R. de Silva then to have agreed to include divisive provisions in the constitution that compromised the national policies steadfastly advocated by the LSSP earlier and now by the APRC chairman Prof. Tissa Vitharana for submitting proposals recommending the selective (not full as approved by Parliament in 1987) implementation of the 13th Amendment. In an interview given to the Sunday weekly ‘The Nation’ February 3, Prof. Vitharana said: “I would have preferred very much if this question of the 13′” Amendment implementation had not come up till we finalized our main report. But considering the fact that this was an unforeseen development, and the fact that the Executive President of the country, the person who set up both the APC and the APRC, requested that the APRC immediately addressed what he felt was a pressing need, I as the chairman, together with the rest of the APRC, had little option but to accede to his request.” He then went on to say: “If the whole exercise was something which I was doing as a member of my party the LSSP, or together with a few other like minded political parties, then I could have acted differently. But under the circumstances I hope the people of Sri Lanka as well as those abroad who are interested in the future of our country will understand the circumstances which have led me to follow the course that the APRC has now taken.”

1978 constitution

The 1978 constitution was an affront to the Tamils, who expected some redemption from the discrimination endured under the previous constitution. Having pledged to address the Tamils’ grievances along with other promises to the entire electorate, the UNP secured five-sixth majority seats in the 1977 parliamentary election. The insult to the considerable support the Tamils gave was mainly because of the total disregard of the commitment given to resolve their main problems stated in the UNP’s election manifesto soon after the election. This belied the hope many Tamils had of regaining the legitimate rights as equal citizens of one integrated nation-state, home to all ethnic communities who have been living for centuries in different parts of the island. The different demographic distribution across the provinces from the Northern tip to the Southern end of the island has been an intrinsic feature, since the time Portuguese set foot in 1505. Not only hope but also trust in the Sinhala political leadership was shattered by the deceit.

The UNP’s 1977 election manifesto stated: “We will ensure that every citizen, whether he belongs to a majority or minority, racial, religious or caste group enjoys equal and basic human rights and opportunities”. It acknowledged that the problems faced by the Tamils were in the four areas, namely, (a) education; (b) colonization; (c) use of the Tamil language and (d) public and semi-public employment. The inference of discerning persons was – the then Sinhalese political leaders knew the problems of the Tamils but had no desire or the determination to resolve them.

The 1978 Constitution retained rigidly the unitary structure of the 1972 Constitution and made significant changes granting executive powers to an elected President. The weakness arising from the inadequate checks and balances in the 1972 constitution was exacerbated by the creation of the powerful Executive Presidency. The President is not answerable to the elected House of Representatives and enjoys immunity from prosecution for any wrongdoings. The designers of the 1972 constitution by abolishing the Second Chamber (Senate) and judicial review of legislations made the Parliament supreme but after 6 years the Executive Presidency became supreme. Since the Executive President is also elected by the entire electorate he too is exercising the power of the people like the Parliament. This is how democracy functions now in Sri Lanka.

The first Executive President J. R. Jayewardene described the extent of powers he had as powerful to accomplish anything except to change a man into a woman. Unfortunately, such powers were not used for solving national problems but to achieve narrow political aims. The problem that arose when the President and the Prime Minister were from rival political parties was not considered seriously by the architect of the 1978 constitution. This is not surprising as his plan did not consider the likely needs and developments in the long term, except to ensure that his structure could not be demolished easily by his successors. Rohan Edirisinha, a constitutional expert has on several occasions questioned the suitability of the 1978 constitution for ensuring stability, the rule of law, good governance and in general creating conditions conducive for nation building and social and economic development.

Drawing attention to the non-implementation of all the provisions of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that was ratified by the Parliament on November 14, 1987, Rohan Edirisinha has opined that “this failure questions the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law in the country: Constitutions that permit non implementation of its provisions and do not provide for an appropriate legal remedy in such situations, are flawed Constitutions.” The Constitutional Council set up under the 17th Amendment is not functioning because of the long delay in appointing the members. With regard to the present crisis of Constitutionalism, he added that “Constitutions cannot rely on political will or, the goodwill of the people in power, for success”. This is very true when those in power have other important matters concerning their hold on power to consider. He also said, at present, “The basis of Constitutionalism is suspicion and skepticism of those who wield power”.

It is not only ethnic harmony but also efficient management of public finances and public service including the police and the judiciary on which depends social stability are essential for venturing seriously on nation building. The ‘home made’ constitutions have permanently divided the population into majority and minority communities based on ethnicity. In retrospect, Soulbury Constitution had provisions and the checks and balances favourable for building a robust nation on the basis of one people bonded by goodwill and the common desire to live peacefully and prosper in their traditional habitats. This was not the intent of the architects of the 1972 and 1978 constitutions.

R. K. H. M. Fernando, former Director General, Public Finance of the General Treasury has also observed: “The bare legal framework envisaged in the Soulbury Constitution and the simple legal framework relating to public finance mainly contained in the Appropriation Act as well as the Financial Regulations provided an adequate controlling framework with proper checks and balances at the time of independence”. Two other comments he made in his article titled-’Sixty-year decline in public financial control’ (the Island 14 February 2008) are worth mentioning here. “The 1972 Constitution introduced far-reaching changes in the field of Parliamentary control over public finance as well as over the then existing impartial public service which was an essential ingredient to ensure the former. But even the 1972 Constitution did not cause much damage to Parliamentary control of public finance as it did in the case of public service. As a result of doing away with the Public-Service Commission and making Permanent Secretaries mere Secretaries under the mercy of the cabinet of ministers, the very core of the independent and impartial public service which was inherited from the British was dealt a severe blow”. The high level of corruption in the country is symptomatic of the weaknesses in the politicized administrative system. Recent moves to weaken the commission and committees set up to deter bribery and corruption are shocking. The arbitrary removal of the Director General of Bribery Commission allegedly to undermine the ongoing investigations likely to embarrass the government also shows the loopholes that allow political interference even in commissions intended to function independently.

The responsibility to ensure the voted funds are spent as proposed in the budget rests with the Parliament. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) appointed by the Parliament reviewed all expenditures in voted funds and in advance accounts activities. When the public sector expanded and funds were allocated outside the Consolidated Fund, these escaped the scrutiny of the PAC. In order to extend Parliament’s control over the public funds outside the Consolidated Fund, a parallel Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) was appointed. The purpose was lost following the lack of serious follow-up action on the recent alarming findings of the COPE and the PAC. This too confirms the inherent weaknesses in the present system.

Damaging actions

Recently, there have been many cases where the official decisions and actions have buttressed the notion of two nations or states in Sri Lanka. These have been made contrary to the pressing need to annul politically the case for separation. Equating separatism with terrorism will not avert the need for a permanent political solution to the protracted conflict. The so called ’short-term solution’ of the President mentioned by Prof. Tissa Vitharana in ‘The Nation’ interview is only a way of dodging the challenge.

As illustrations of the damage done to the concept of one Nation of multi-ethnic communities, two recent cases are mentioned here. 376 Tamils resident in Colombo were forcibly evicted and expelled from the city on June 7, 2007 by security forces. Those evicted included infants, the elderly and those who came to Colombo for medical treatment. They were not terrorists by any stretch of imagination. The only reason given for their ‘deportation’ was they had ‘no valid’ reason to leave their home land! Following an interim court order halting the process, the authorities brought back 140 of those expelled to the North-East.

The heartrending case of the 10-year old bright girl who was refused admission to a leading school in Colombo following the directive of the Minister of Education has upset many Sinhalese too. Nethmi Lavanya Yogendra was placed second in the Colombo District after securing 190 marks at the Year 5 scholarship exam held August last year. On the Minister’s order she was denied admission to Vishaka Vidyalaya solely on the grounds of her ethnicity. According to press reports, her father, Yogendra is a Tamil Buddhist and had studied at Ananda College Colombo. Nethmi studied in the Sinhalese medium at President’s College, Nawala. What does this establish? A Tamil even if he or she has studied in Sinhala medium cannot be equal amongst the equals! After inflicting the damage, particularly to the Sinhala-Buddhist society the girl was, reportedly, granted admission to the same school.

It is the notion of Sinhala nation or Sinhala supremacy and the actions thereof that gave rise to the claim for a separate Tamil nation or Tamil state. One of the strategies of the LTTE to divide the country has been to intensify the ethnic division brought about by government policies, actions and inaction. This was also used to justify their armed struggle for independent Tamil state in the North-East. The present military offensive to banish terrorism without any meaningful step to make the case for separation unwarranted is also the customary way of trying to control intricate problems rather than resolving them once and for all.

Rohan Edirisinha in his analysis of ‘Constitutional Challenges’ Daily Mirror 6 February 2008 has recalled former President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s candid admission ten years ago that the country has failed in the challenge of nation building, In this regard he has said: “the nation building project continues to be a failure, and sadly does not even seem to be a priority of the present political leadership.” He also said: “The Rajapaksa Government’s strategy seems to be one of nation building through defeating terrorism. This is simplistic and shortsighted as it fails to consider that while terrorism is one aspect of the challenge, the causes of terrorism, the history of the island’s ethnic conflict, the grievances and aspirations of the Tamil people, and basic principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law have also to be addressed if Sri Lanka is to survive as a united, independent and free nation state”.

His concluding remark is also very relevant here. “The Constitution of Sri Lanka is a major part of the problem. Offering solutions within the framework of the problem is not only unreasonable, but also suggests a lack of understanding, empathy and seriousness of purpose on the part of its proponents”.

A glimmer of hope for rebuilding the nation damaged by divisive politics and ill conceived constitution exists mainly because of liberal Sinhalese who have openly condemned the destructive methods used by narrow-minded political leaders in seeking their immediate aims. Civil society organizations led by the Congress of Religions including the Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, the Organisation of Professional Associations and the Law and Society Trust among others decided recently to urge the political parties to implement immediately the 17th Amendment and warned further delay would compel them to rally public opinion against the government and the opposition. According to them, 60 percent of the Executive power would be lost when it is fully implemented. This may be the reason for the reluctance to implement. Hopefully, a civil movement to press for a truly unifying development-oriented constitution will soon emerge. An important lesson learnt from past experience is the task of drafting the Nation’s constitution should not be the sole responsibility of power seeking leaders who are keen on incorporating their separate agendas. A broad farsighted approach is needed for the constitution of any country to withstand future changes.

[The writer is Former Additional Deputy Secretary to the Treasury, Sri Lanka and UN Advisor, Development Economics/Planning]