.

Proposed equal opportunity legislation

Introduction and objectives of the Act The Ministry of Justice, Constitutional Affairs, Ethnic Affairs and National Integration has, after intense consultation with political groups, academics, the business community, human rights activists, women’s groups and non-governmental organizations, formulated draft Equal opportunity legislation which will:

• make discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, gender, religious or political opinion, language, caste, age or disability, in employment, education, access to public places and means of transportation and in the provision of accommodation and goods and services unlawful to ensure the recognition and acceptance within the community, of the equality of all persons;

• provide for the formulation and implementation of equal opportunity programmes by employers ensuring the realization of equality of opportunity in the work place, in relation to both ethnicity and gender;

• provide for the establishment of an Equal opportunity Commission and an Equal opportunity Tribunal;

• provide for the elimination of sexual harassment in the work place and in educational institutions and public places and the elimination of sexual harassment related to accommodation.

Structure of the Act

The proposed Equal opportunity Act is structured in the following manner:

Part I declares that sexual harassment in a number of circumstances including the work place, educational institutions, facilities for accommodation, the provision of goods and services and in public transportation is unlawful. An expanded definition of sexual harassment is included which will bring more forms of inappropriate conduct within the scope of harassment. It also provides for a positive duty to be cast on employers to preclude and take preventive action against harassment in the work place. Part I also caters for discrimination in the work place, in education, access to public places and transportation, accommodation provided by businesses and in the provision of goods and services.

Part 11 provides for programmes that shall be implemented by employers with a workforce of over 100 employees. The Part provides for reporting, monitoring of programmes and penalties for default. Programmes will be required to address the following issues:

• training programmes on equal opportunity for employees in that Institution;
• pay equity;
• elimination of sexual harassment;
• schemes of recruitment and promotion; and
occupational segregation in such Institution.

Employers governed by Part II will have to develop a policy statement, collate and analyse employment statistics in such Institution, review human resources policies and practices in such institution, establish a strategic plan that incorporates the employer’s objectives and the strategies and time tables for achieving those objectives and monitor and evaluate the success of the implementation of that strategic plan.

Part III deals with the first body which will oversee the implementation of the Act - the Equal opportunity Commission which will be a representative body on which women and the private sector will be represented. The President in consultation with the Prime Minister and Leader of the opposition and the Speaker will appoint the members of the Commission. An advisory body consisting of experts in the field of human rights will assist the Commission. The Commission will entertain public complaints and will attempt to resolve disputes by conciliation. The Commission will also play an important role in information dissemination and popularizing the concept of Equal opportunity among the public and private sectors and the public.

Part IV provides for the establishment of an Equal opportunity Tribunal which will be an adjudicatory body which will resolve disputes referred to it by the Commission. The Tribunal shall comprise of a retired judge of the Superior Courts and two lawyers with experience in the field of human rights. The Tribunal shall be appointed in the same manner as the Commission. An appeal lies to the Supreme Court with leave first had and obtained there from a decision of the Tribunal.

Part V deals with the arrangements for the Fund of the Commission and financial control and accounting procedures.

Part V deals with incidental matters including protection against victimization, immunity for bona fide official acts by the Commission or Tribunal. Review and amendment of the Act and interpretation of terms in the legislation.

The main objective of the legislation is to provide for equality of opportunity for all persons in all instances where it is practically feasible. A certain degree of flexibility is permissible given the realities of any given situation whilst not detracting from the overall thrust and aims of the Act. The Act will encourage and promote the adoption of the standard of equality of opportunity, not through rigid quotas, but through the gradual adoption of criteria and practices that will assure the achievement of the standards described in the legislation.

It is proposed to hold further discussion with key groups representing workers, employers and other stake holders in the legislation prior to submission to the legislative process. The draft is released in the interest of facilitating informed public discussion on this vital law.

Professor G. L. Peiris
Minister of Justice, Constitutional Affairs, Ethnic Affairs & National Integration and Deputy Minister of Finance

The Week That Was
Allaying Sinhala - Muslim perceived misunderstandings

by Shan Wijetunga
M. H. Mohamed, MP led a delegation of six Muslims for a discussion at the residence of Susil Moonesinghe last Saturday.

The discussion was aimed at allaying certain fears among the Muslim community that there was growing dissension in the congenial relationship between the Muslim and the Sinhala communities.

This discussion was a sequel to an earlier one held at Hilton Hotel last week attended by Muslim parliamentarians of all political parties and prominent Muslim citizens.

The Muslim delegates included in addition to M. H. Mohamed, Attorney-at-Law Faiz Mustapha, businessmen Hussain Hasheem, and Fauzool Khalid.

The Sinhala Buddhist delegates were represented by MPs Susil Moonesinghe, Dr. Sarath Amunugama, Rukman Senanayake, Tilak Karunaratne and a reputed Buddhist monk presently involved in politics.

At the inception of the discussion, the Muslim delegates emphasised the centuries old cordial relationship between the Sinhala and Muslim communities.

They informed that they had even gone before the Sinhala Commission to give evidence to avoid any possible dissension in the Sinhala - Muslim unity.

The Sinhala Buddhist delegates however maintained that apart from disagreeing with the formation of the Sri Lanka’s Muslim Congress, a communal party, Sinhala-Muslim relations otherwise was and is always cordial.

The Muslim delegates also lamented over the debate between Muslim Congress leader, M. H. M. Ashroff and Ven. Gangodawila Soma Thero.

"Our MPs appealed to Ashroff not to take part in the debate, but he was adament" said M. H. Mohamed.

The Ven Buddhist monk participating in the discussion said whatever may be the individual ideas on this question in a democratic framework not only Ashroff even Thondaman can be called for a debate. But the important issue at this moment is the North-East conflict. Instead of concentrating on that problem what is being done is to put forward the package. There is no Muslim-Sinhala conflict. But they are trying to create one to enable them to put forward the package. So it is best for the Muslims and Sinhala communities to pay attention to this issue and take action to defeat the package", stated the Ven. Thero.

After further discussions Mr. Mohamed proposed that further discussions be held in order to prevent any possible eroding of the very cordial relationship between the Sinhala and Muslim communities.

Accordingly it was decided to meet once a month to discuss current development.

Susil Moonesinghe proposed that Rauf Hakeem of the Muslim Congress and Minister A. H. M. Fowzie be also invited for the next discussion.

Black flags

While discussions were in progress to bring about closer relationship between the Sinhala and Muslim communities the Muslim Congress protested the Opposition leader’s tour of the east.

Opposition leader Ranil Wickremasinghe, UNP President Karu Jayasuriya and General Secretary, Gamini Athukorale toured Ampara last Saturday to participate in a rally at Kalmunai organised by Myoon Mustapha, the former Muslim Congress national organiser now an active UNP member.

The party was met in Ampara by P. Dayaratne, Chandradasa Galappatti, Yasendra Bakmeewewa and Ali Safeer Maulana.

The MP, Mr. Dayaratne informed the Leader of the Opposition that the Muslim Congress was organising protest demonstration against him.

There was also information that a Ports Authority vehicle arrived in Samanthurai with banners and black flags.

Abdul Majeed, a former MP on Sunday morning informed Dayaratne that all green flags hoisted in Samanthurai had been cut down and replaced with black flags. Also that a certain party had shot in the air the previous night to frighten UNP supporters in the area.

MP Dayaratne then contacted Senior Superintendent of the Police in the area and informed of the demonstration against the Leader of Opposition.

Then along with Bakmeewea and Galappatti, Dayaratne proceeded to meet Minister Ashroff at his residence at Ampara and informed him of the demonstration and asked him the reason for such a protest.

But the Minister vehemently denied any knowledge of any such demonstration and pointed out the possibility of staging such a demonstration against Myoon Mustapha. Nevertheless he promised to inform the police to take suitable action.

The motorcade carrying the Opposition leader and party proceeding from Ampara towards Kalmunai arrived at Hijra junction where over a 100 persons carrying black flags and banners demonstrated alongside the road.

The banners read "Ranil Go Home", "Ranil, you have no place here." The vehicles at the rear end of the motorcade also had been stoned.

After the rally at Kalmuani, the Opposition leader and party proceeded to Inginiyagala to participate in the celebrations commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Gal Oya scheme.

Among others present at these celebrations were Deputy Minister of Defence, Gen. Anuruddha Ratwatte and Minister of Ports and Rehabilitation, Mr. Ashroff.

Ironically Minister Ashroff was seated beside Opposition leader, Ranil Wickramasinghe. When Ranil inquired from Ashroff regarding the Muslim Congress demonstration, Ashroff stated that it may have been held against Mustapha. But Ranil said the banners contained slogans against him. But Ashroff persisted that he had no hand in this demonstration.

Ronnie’s dilemma

MP, Ronnie de Mel had summoned a meeting of the district politburo of the party at the party office, Totamuna, Matara.

The Secretary of the district politburo Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena had sent a letter excusing himself from attending the meeting. The only party MP present was H. R. Wimalasiri. Party Urban Councillors, Pradeshiya Sabha members of the district and cluster organisers were present.

While the meeting was in progress former U.C. Chairman, Matara, Bandula Abeysuriya questioned the right of the President politburo to summon this meeting stating that the meeting should have been summoned by the Secretary to the district politburo. He pointed out that there appeared to be a rift between the President and the Secretary and that was the reason why the President had unsurped the powers of the Secretary to summon this meeting.

President, Ronie de Mel then ordered Bandula Abeysuriya out of the meeting which was disapproved by most of those present.

Finally Ronnie De Mel abandoned the meeting.

Dinner party

Immediately after the Cabinet meeting last Wednesday the President hosted a dinner party for the Ministers at the Presidential Secretariat. Invitation for the party had been extended to the spouses of the ministers, too.

The party commenced around 11.00 p.m. with music provided by the Sri Lanka Navy band.

This party was been the result of Cabinet ministers prevailing upon the President to celebrate the success of the fifth anniversary of the government.

Business community

Another meeting by the business community to find solutions to the north east conflict was held last Wednesday at BMICH, Colombo presided by Lalith Kotalawela.

The government was represented by Ministers Prof. G. L. Peiris, M. H. M. Ashroff, Southern Provincial Governor, Neville Kanakaratne and Western Provincial Governor, K. Vignarajah. UNP was represented by A. C. S. Hameed, K. N. Choksy and Ronnie de Mel.

Kotalawela informed the meeting of the seven areas on which there was no unanimity the most difficult of being the decentralisation of power.

Mr. Hameed said he was in the process of discussing the decisions arrived at these meetings with the political parties representing minority communities.

It was therefore decided to allow two weeks time to finalise the discussions with the minority commitees. The next meeting therefore will be summoned in October.

Jeyaraj - Ravi

The main topic of discussion within political circles recently was the settlement of the defamation case filed by MP, Ravi Karunanayake against Minister, Jeyaraj Fernandopulle.

Ravi Karunanayake had filed a case against Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle in the Colombo District courts charging that the minister in the course of a television interview had made certain remarks that defamed the character of Karunanayake.

Following agreement reached by both parties concerned a motion was filed in courts for the settlement of the case.

After the settlement of the case MP Karunanayake walked up to Minister Fernandopulle present in courts and shook hands.

Demonstration

The Leader of the Opposition summoned all UNP parliamentarians, Provincial councellors and electoral organisers of the Western province to his office to educate them on the protest rally organised by the Youth Front of the party on September 8 against the proposed educational reforms.

Among those present were John Amaratunga. Joseph Michael Perera, Thilak Karunanayake, Dr. Karunasena Kodituwakku etc.

Some of the educational reforms proposed are to increase the number of examinations, to close 232 schools where attendance of students were less than 50, use of calculators made compulsory from next year by students, the holding of a general knowledge examination for G.C.E. (Advanced Level) students who obtained high marks and qualified to universities.

L E G A L W A T C H
Joy over cricket and concern over crime

by Nayana
The victory of Sri Lanka’s cricketers in the final of the "Aiwa Cup" appears not only to have restored public pride in the national cricket team but also cemented the reputation of the new Selectors and the Interim Committee presently running the Cricket Board.

Yet it should not be forgotten that the Interim Committee leads a precarious existence in law. There is a twofold legal battle presently before the courts. In the first instance, the Interim Committee is able to run the affairs of the Board only so long as the interim injunction obtained by Clifford Ratwatte against Thilanga Sumithapala and the other office bearers of the recently elected Board remains in force. That injunction is presently under challenge in the Court of Appeal.

In addition, there is a separate action filed by some Executive Committee members challenging the legality of the appointment of the Interim Committee. The plaintiffs in the case argue that the Minister’s powers under the Sports Law to make interim arrangements for continuing the functions of a National Sports Association cannot be exercised in circumstances such as these.

As both cases are pending, we cannot discuss their merits, but suffice it to say that both sides are well represented by leading counsel and no party to litigation can ever be entirely sure of the outcome. However, if the concerned professionals who have come forward to help Sri Lankan cricket in its hour of need — and shown favourable results in a very short time - should find themselves thrown out of office due to a legal wrangle that is not of their making, it will be a powerful disincentive to other professionals to come forward in the future.

Furthermore, as there are points of law involved, either side may, with leave, be able to take the cases right up to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile there will be a cloud hanging over our national cricket administration for months if not years, which, as happened in England last summer, may prevent the country’s representatives from properly participating at meetings of the ICC and other international or regional bodies.

There is only one way this unhappy scenario can be avoided, and that is by an Act of Parliament. While legislative intervention in the affairs of sporting associations may not always be desirable or popular, there is little doubt that in this instance the general public, and probably the majority of players as well, would welcome a continuance of what is widely perceived as a new professional style of management, devoid of personality battles and inflated egos.

However, any such legislation must be directed strictly to solving the problem at hand, which is how to ensure the continuance of professional management in a money-rich sport which seems to be throwing up the wrong kind of people through its own internal electoral process. (It is interesting to note that the only category of persons prohibited from holding office in the BCCSL are employees and directors of newspaper companies. Match promoters, TV companies, bookies, manufacturers or importers of cricketing gear would all be OK.!)

Any new law would, firstly, have to give the appointing authority unambiguous power to dissolve the existing Board of Control and appoint a new one for a specified interim period. Secondly, it would have to put in place some new mechanism for the appointment of future Boards, perhaps substituting a mandatory consultative process with the various cricket associations rather than the present free-for-all electoral process.

In order to avoid upheaval in other sports, such a piece of legislation should not take the form of an amendment to the Sports Law but should be a special law governing cricket. If successful, it can be extended (or similar laws enacted) to cover other national sports.

Such legislation should, of course, be prospective in its operation. While Parliament did, on one notorious occasion in 1978, pass legislation expressly nullifying the judgment of a court, any direct interference with the pending court proceedings would only leave room for controversy and mar an otherwise popular measure. Hence, once the new legislation is passed, the proper procedure would be to dissolve the present interim committee and re-appoint the same persons under the provisions of the new law.

Such a procedure would effectively put an end to the case challenging the appointment of the interim committee, but in a way that would not overrule any court order or prejudge the legitimacy of the claims of either side. The other case, between Ratwatte and Sumathipala, will be reduced to one of academic interest only, the two parties may be free to claim damages from each other but the outcome would not affect the administration of cricket which would have been put on a statutory foundation.

Fighting crime

The growing public concern over crime was reflected in this year’s choice of subject for the annual Kanchana Abhayapala memorial lecture organized by the Legal Services section of Sarvodaya.

It was titled "Coping with the crime wave: What can law and society do?" However, the speaker, Justice Shirani Thilakawardena, took the view that ‘coping’ was not the best word. In her view, every person has a responsibility to do whatever they can to combat this wave, and the higher a person is placed, the greater his or her responsibility.

Associated with Justice Thilakawardena at this function was Dr. Kiran Bedi, India’s top woman police officer and presently Joint Commissioner, Delhi Police. In the mid 1990s she won international fame for transforming India’s largest prison, Tihar Central Jail, from a hotbed of drugs and corruption to a model penal institution where jailors are said to walk unarmed even in its innermost corridors.

From both speakers came a strong emphasis on the importance of individual effort and example at every level. They did not absolve the State of its responsibilities, but were clear that citizens should not escape their own duties by placing all the blame on "the government".

In response to a question about external pressures being exerted on public officers who seek to perform their duties, both speakers stated that it was their personal experience that if an officer makes it clear that he/she is not amenable to pressure, outsiders tend to stop asking for favours.

On the other hand, they also conceded that such officers may have to pay a price by way of transfers to unpopular stations, etc., but this was a necessary sacrifice to safeguard public values and the well-being of future generations. Dr. Bedi whose biography is titled "I Dare", also made the point that a seemingly unfavourable transfer can sometimes be used to transform an unpleasant place into something better.

The call for moral commitment was matched by a sound grasp of practicalities. Integrity, it was said, must be accompanied by efficiency, good laws are useless if the implementation is weak, stringent punishment will have no deterrent effect if offenders are not apprehended.

Justice Thilakawardana, presently sitting in the Court of Appeal, used her ten years’ experience in the High Court to illustrate with graphic examples just what was going wrong in our criminal justice system. Two matters will illustrate the point: The high percentage of trials which proceed in the absence of the accused (empty verdict — offender still at large), and the yet unplugged lacuna in the law that permits convicted rapists and child abusers - perpetrators of the very crimes about which the most public concern has being voiced in recent times - to avoid being fingerprinted.

An idea accepted - one might almost say taken for granted - by all at the discussion, was that an independent police commission is a basic requirement for an efficient fight against crime. Dr. Bedi suggested a simple mechanism for the appointment of the Inspector-General, namely a three member body comprising a representative of the Government, a representative of the Leader of the Opposition, and an eminent citizen acceptable to both.

This is the "constitutional council" idea, streamlined by a drastic reduction in the number of persons whose consent is necessary. It reflects the concern of the professional, that decision-making should be quick as well as correct.

An open letter to President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga

Your Excellency,

The Government’s Devolution Proposals

According to a report appearing in the "Divaina" newspaper on 9th August 1999, you had stated that you were prepared to receive and consider the views of those who were opposed to the Government’s devolution proposals known as the "package". We welcome this statement and, as an organisation which from its very inception was strongly opposed to the overnment’s devolution proposals, we write to place our views before you and hope they will receive Your Excellency’s careful consideration.

At the outset we should like to state that we are not a political party nor are we affiliated to any political party. We are an independent organisation and our main objectives have been the preservation of the unitary character of the Sri Lankan state and the protection of its sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as working towards the creation of political structures that would replace the adversarial politics which is the bane to the country with politics based on co-operation and consensus foster communal harmony and ensure the rapid economic development of the country.

We have already sent Your Excellency a copy of the Interim Report of the Sinhala Commission which sets out in detail the disastrous consequences for this country inherent in the government’s devolution proposals. We are in total agreement with these observations and the purpose of this letter is to supplement what is stated there by drawing attention to a few matters of vital importance.

The Unitary State

Sri Lanka is a small country comprising only 65,000 square kilo meters. Its geographical features are such, that with all the rivers that water all parts of the country originating in the central hills, the proper economic development of the country can be ensured only if there is a centralized authority in overall control of all vital matters having an impact on the economy such as land, rivers, forests etc. It is mainly for this reason that all Constitutions introduced from the time we received independence - the Soulbury Constitution, the 1972 Constitution of the United Front Government (of which the SLFP was the chief constituent) and the 1978 Constitution introduced by the UNP maintained the unitary constitutional structure of the state with one centralized authority in over-all charge.

To fragment the country into eight, nine or even ten parts as the Government’s Constitutional proposals intend to do and to grant vast powers to the proposed Regional Councils will not only make the proper economic development of the country impossible but lead to serious disputes not only between Regions but between the Regions and the Government. In the recent GMOA strike we have already had evidence of the type of dispute that can arise and the hardship it can cause to the ordinary people of this country, especially the poor, who depend on state services. As far as we understand it the reason for the strike was the refusal by one Provincial Council to follow a procedure that had been decided upon and approved by the Cabinet. If such disputes can occur (and, as we said cause hardship to the people) even with the limited powers devolved to Provincial Councils, one can imagine what the situation would be when absolute powers are devolved to Regional Councils as is proposed in the devolution package.

The Sinhala Commission’s Interim Report gives detailed reasons showing the disastrous impact, both political and economic, on the country if the government’s proposals are adopted and it is not necessary for us to repeat them. We would only request Your Excellency to read that Report carefully and not consign it to the "dustbin of history" as advocated by one of your Ministers for that Report has been written not to advance the interests of the Sinhala people but to prevent the fragmentation of the country which would have disastrous consequences not only for the Sinhala people but for all its people Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim and Burgher.

National Disintegration?

We note that Your Excellency has created a Ministry of National Integration we suppose with the intention of fostering national integration. However, if the government’s devolution package is implemented, it will lead not to national integration but to national disintegration. We say this because for the first time since we obtained independence fifty years ago provision is to be made in a Constitution for the division of the country on the basis of ethnicity. For the effect of Article 127 of the Government’s proposals for a new Constitution is very likely to be the setting up of a Tamil majority North-Eastern Regional Council comprising the Northern Province combined with the Trincomalee and Batticaloa Districts of the Eastern Province and a Muslim majority South Eastern Regional Council comprising the polling divisions of Kalmunai, Sammanturai and Pottuwil of the present Eastern Province. It may be noted that the proposed South-Eastern Regional Council will include the Panama Pattu which is 89% Sinhalese and comprises 924 sq. k.m. or 49% of the total land area of the proposed South Eastern Region but, this Pattu is to be forcibly (i.e. without the consent of the people) placed under the control of a Muslim majority Regional Council. Under these proposals & Sinhala majority polling division of Ampara may form a separate Regional Council or be attached to the Uva Province.

These proposals, if implemented will, result in the Eastern Province being split into three on the basis of ethnicity. One result of this proposal is that the Tamil majority North-Eastern Regional Council will be in control of the entire sea-coast from Mannar in the west to Batticaloa in the east, including the coast closest to Tamil Nadu. In addition the Muslim majority South-Eastern Regional Council will be in control of the coast from Kalmunai to Pothuvil. Thus the Tamil majority North-Eastern Regional Council and the Muslim majority South-Eastern Regional Councils will together be in control of nearly 2/3rds of the coastline of Sri Lanka including the coast closest to India. Apart from the grave implications for the security of the country (the Regional police force under the Regional Council will be in sole charge of maintaining law and order within the Region) this has serious economic implications for the Sinhala people. For instance, other than migratory fishermen who had enjoyed the right for ages’ no Sinhala fishermen will be able to fish or exploit the marine and aquatic resources within two-thirds of the territorial waters of this country if the Tamil majority North-eastern Regional Council or the Muslim majority South - Eastern Regional Council refuse them permission to do so since control over fisheries, marine and aquatic resources within territorial waters (excluding the rights of migrating fisheries is devolved to Regional Councils (item 25 of List II - Regional List) In other words the Sinhala people outside the North and East can be deprived of all access to the marine wealth in two-thirds of the territorial waters of our country.

It makes us wonder whether the framers of these proposals had the slightest conception of their serious implications for the security of the country and the, rights and interests of the Sinhala people or did they simply take over proposals prepared by the TULF solely in the interests of the Tamil people and are they now attempting to compel their adoption by organising street demonstrations? Are those who get on to the streets demanding the adoption of the package aware of the serious implications for the security of the country and the rights of the Sinhala people? How many of them are aware that the creation of a powerful North - Eastern Regional Council with full powers over all internal matters and with its own police force over which the Government will have no control will be the first step towards the eventual break-up of the country? How many of them have read the Interim Report of the Sinhala Commission that has made a detailed examination of the devolution package and pointed out the disastrous consequences both political and economic that would follow their adoption?

The other aspect of this matter is one that relates particularly to the question of national integration for those who framed these proposals appear to have acted as if the Northern and Eastern Provinces are situated in some other country and are not a part of Sri Lanka and that what was done to those two provinces would have no repercussions in the rest of the country. In the first place, division of the country in the North and East on an ethnic basis will lead to a demand for the setting up of similar ethnically - based units in other parts of the country. Already there has been talk of the creation of a unit with an Indian Tamil majority in the central hill country.

The other grave danger in setting up ethnically-based units in the North and East is its potential to cause ethnic disharmony in the country. This is due to the fact that the Tamil and Muslim minorities are not confined to the North and East. Large numbers of them (and in fact the majority in the case of the Muslims) at present live in perfect amity among the Sinhala majority. However, the creation of Tamil-majority and Muslim- majority Regional Councils with vast powers in regard to all internal matters is bound to affect adversely the harmonious relations that now exist between the communities.

To give just one example of what can happen, all powers in regard to the "maintenance and administration of ancient and historical monuments, archaeological sites and records other than those specified in the Reserved List" are devolved to Regional Councils (item 45). The Reserved List (item 55) states that the Government will be in control of the "maintenance and administration of ancient and historical monuments and archaeological sites and records declared, after consulting the relevant Regional Administration , by law to be of national importance "(Emphasis ours). It will be noted that the Government has to consult a Regional Council before it can declare any of the treasures

of our ancient civilisation to be of national importance What would be the situation if a Regional Council refused to agree to a national monument as for example Deegavapi, being declared one of national importance to be protected by the Government and what effect would this have on communal harmony? We have already seen the emotions that have been aroused over events that are reported to have taken place at Deegavapi.

Why the Government should be required to consult Regional authorities before it can take steps to preserve our national heritage and why ancient and historical monuments and archaeological sites and records other than those specified in the Reserved List should have been placed under the control of Regional Councils is a mystery to us - unless it is the intention to see that all traces of our ancient heritage in the North and East are erased in the not too distant future.

Alternatives

Before we close we would like to answer criticism that has been levelled against us, namely that we only oppose the government’s proposals without making any constructive proposals for solving our problems. In answer to these criticisms we would draw Your Excellency’s attention to two documents issued by the Sinhala Commission. The first is its Report (Part I) issued in July 1998 a copy of which was sent to Your Excellency on 21.7.1998 In that Report at pages 175 to 182 the Commission examines the whole question of devolution and makes its own proposals with which we are in entire agreement.

The other document we wish to refer to is the Sinhala Commission’s proposals for a replacement of the present Constitution by a Constitution that would put an end to adversarial politics, usher in a politics of co-operation and consensus in place of confrontation and also allow the minorities too to participate actively in decision-making at the Centre without being confined merely to the peripheries.

Dr. Piyasena Dissanayake,
Secretary,
National Joint Committee

Jaffna through "Southern" eyes

by: D. T. Kingsley Bernard
B.Sc, Dip.Int, Mktg, MBA

I, one of the first batch of students to the Jaffna campus, of the University of Sri Lanka established in October 1974, share, my thoughts and nostalgic memories. I feel it relevant that my experiences, inter alia, my appointment as the first President of the Students Council must be shared in view of the momentous occasion that is to dawn in October. The University of Jaffna is on the threshold of celebrating the 25th anniversary of its inauguration.

I qualified to enter University in the science stream and may have ended in the convenient and convivial environment of the Katubedda or any other Campus of the University of Sri Lanka. Yet, when the challenging prospect of being the first batch of students of the Jaffna Campus arose quite by chance. A group of anxious university entrants of diverse communities boarded the train to Jaffna.

Most of them anxious to gain a University degree knew no more than Jaffna peninsula being "barren land, listless landscapes of sand studded with palmyrah trees". I learnt more of the culture and wealth of educational heritage, industry, diligence and hardworking disposition of those in the Jaffna peninsula. It did not take long for all of us from the so-called south to accept the values and value systems of the north.

I am from Avissawella from a background of educationists. My father and mother school teachers thought, lived and worked tirelessly to promote "education" in the broadest sense of the word. I owe it to my nurturing that I matured in thought even in childhood sans phobias of race and religion, though born into a Sinhala family with deep roots in the south.

We the few from the south were received initially with doubt, distrust and turpitude by not only our compatriots but also the man on the street. We were "foreigners" but it did not take much time for us to feel like one in a wholesome environment of acceptance, trust and respect for our values. Our values were obviously recognised as being trusting and respecting the value systems of those engendered in the life style of the peninsula.

On the subject of the life style of those in the Jaffna peninsula, we must appreciate the psyche of those who were hardworking. The man in his plot of land was seen to toil to water his soil by 4.30 a.m. in the morning. I could visit my tutor, lecturer or even the professor by 6.00 a.m. to seek tutorial clarifications. My respect for the acceptance and accommodation of the people of Jaffna towards the Sinhala and Muslim brethren from the socalled south grew by the day.

The day arrived for me to contest the position of the President of the Science Students Union. I could not believe that I was appointed unanimously. The day came when I was prompted to contest to be elected the President of the Students Council. If one were to doubt communal harmony, the lasting testimony was that I was elected the first President of the Students Union of the University of Jaffna. This election was in the second year of my 4 year academic career. It must speak volumes of the camaraderie and esprit de corps that we enjoyed to insist that I continue as the President of the Students Council till the last year of my eventful academic career in the University.

There are many who speak of ethnic harmony, many are the views published in the media about "Rights" of communities. My personal experiences gained by first hand knowledge of having lived and learnt with diverse minority communities is that they seek not so much "rights" but acceptance as competitors on an even playing field. We were not in Jaffna on a whistle stop visit. We lived for four years, initially to face scrutiny, and thereafter to merit unreserved acceptance. The erudite academic staff of the University will always be revered for their quality of commitment for the unquantifiable knowledge they imparted with dedication and for the lasting values they instilled in us.

It is relevant also to record that value for learning in general and education in particular was so high that when we students went to the Government hospital for medical attention, the medical officer would prescribe that "students" be treated first. This is just but an example of well founded priorities. They sought education through intense industry but yet, they did respect superior intellect and leadership, on merit.

The people of Jaffna from the illustrious academies to the humble industrious farmer, accepted us as humans of the same ilk. It was more than evident that they sought to merge in thought and deed than divide. The alumnae of this prestigious and premier University - which has produced over 10,000 graduates todate - will endeavour to forge much, much more than so-called communal harmony.

It is relevant to quote from Cardinal Newman who valued University education in the widest and the most appropriate perspective. "If I were to describe briefly......what a University was I should draw my answer from its ancient designation of Stadium General (School of Universal Learning). This description implies an assemblage of strangers from all parts in one spot, from all parts, else.....and in one spot, else, how can there be any school at all?"

This pertinent reference to "an assemblage of strangers from all parts in one spot" worked miracles in the minds and attitudes of all those in the milieu who had the good fortune to appreciate the wealth the University of Jaffna afforded us, the first intake of undergraduates.

I learn that the distinguished Benjamin Disraeli said in the House of Commons as far back as 11th March 1873, that "A University should be a place of light, of liberty and of learning". Most of all, the "LEARNING" in the campus of Jaffna was far beyond even the definition of "EDUCATION" by Cardinal Newman. It was the well primed venue for the meeting of minds from diverse backgrounds to weld lasting relationships. The excellent academic exposure apart, we learnt the lesson of a life time. United we stand divided we fall.’

I wish the University of Jaffna prosperity and progress to foster further educational excellence. We the alumine of the Colombo Chapter are hopeful of going to Jaffna to seek our academic roots. Most of our mentors are no more, but the few of our yesteryear colleagues have promised to meet us at the airport - not at the old railway station!

I wish to conclude with a thought expressed by the late John F. Kennedy "Progress does not come from revolutions of human beings but by the evolutions of institutions."

Evolutions of institutions such as my revered seal of learning must evolve to greater heights. That is the fervent desire and hope of all of us alumine.

A preliminary meeting of the Colombo Chapter of the Alumni Association will be held at the Institute of Indigenous Medicine, Rajagiriya, University of Colombo, on 5th of September 1999, at 10.00 a.m. All the past students of Jaffna University are invited to this meeting.

A crucial referendum in East Timor

by Dr. Stanley Kalpage
In 1975, the Portuguese hurriedly left East Timor after centuries of neglectful colonial rule. Civil war was about to break out when Indonesian troops under General Suharto invaded and annexed the territory. There were many allegations of human rights violations against the Indonesian authorities and resentment developed among the East Timorese who increasingly clamoured for independence. After the authoritarian Suharto resigned in 1998, his successor, president B. J. Habibie agreed to allow the East Timorese to decide their own future in a referendum to be supervised by the United Nations.

Violence broke out in East Timor, especially in the capital Dili, between pro-independence activists and pro-integration armed militia, evidently encouraged by some sections of the Indonesian military. The Indonesian government rejected any UN peace-keeping mission or foreign troops being used to maintain law and order but agreed to maintain the peace with the help of the Indonesian police.

Many Indonesians believe that, should East Timor become independent and break away from Indonesia, this would encourage other separatist elements in the widely dispersed Indonesian archipelago to follow suit. On the other hand, most East Timorese feel that if independence is denied to them, a civil war would break out in the territory.

Integration or Independenc?

At the referendum on 30 August 1999, the people of East Timor were asked to choose between autonomy within Indonesia or an independent state. The mostly illiterate voters were confused about the manner in which they had to exercise their choice. The ballot papers contained two flags one that of the Indonesian Republic and the other of East Timor.

If, by a simple majority, the voters choose to remain within the Indonesian federation then Indonesia would change its constitution to provide for the Special Autonomous Region of East Timor. This change would have to be approved by the Peoples’ Consultative Assembly in November and the UN would remain to see that the law was being implemented.

If the autonomy package is rejected, Indonesia would annul the annexation of East Timor, withdraw from the territory, and hand power over to the United Nations. The UN would then establish a transitional authority until power is transferred to the East Timorese. The transitional authority would be in place for about five years, until an independent, democratic government functions in East Timor.

Jose "Xanana" Gusmao

The Independence movement in East Timor has thrown up a number of well-known leaders. A key figure in the pro-independence movement is Jose Alexandre "Xanana" Gusmao, presently under house arrest in Jakarta. Gusmao is revered by many East Timorese and is widely believed to become the president if the referendum verdict is in favour of independence.

Interviewed by Asiaweek recently, he was optimistic about the chances of reconciliation when the results of the referendum were known. He has said that East Timor government would adhere to the market economy and grant amnesty to those accused of political crime. President Habibie has promised to release Gusmao on 15 September, one week after the announcement of the verdict of the referendum.

Jose Ramos Horta

Jose Ramos Horta, who lived in Australia until recently, is another pro-independence activist. He was a freedom fighter even when East Timor was under what Horta calls "an obscure footnote in the Portuguese colonial empire". He was condemned by the Portuguese in 1971-72 for spreading "subversive allegations against Portuguese colonial rule". When the Portuguese left hurriedly in 1975 and fighting broke out between rival East Timorese groups, Horta left for the UN Security Council to plead for UN intervention to protect the sovereignty of East Timor.

Three days before Indonesia invaded East Timor, Horta fled the territory. He has been advocating the cause of Timorese independence for twenty three years. Though branded as a criminal and a traitor by the Indonesian government, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize along with Timor’s spiritual leader, Catholic bishop Carlos Felipe Ximenes Belo.

The award of the Nobel Peace Prize drew international acclaim to Horta’s efforts to win independence and angered Suharto who countered that the people of East Timor had agreed to remain with Indonesia. For a time, Horta was foreign minister in the government formed by the Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (Fretilin) led by Xanana Gusmao.

From exile in the UK and in Australia, Horta has orchestrated a campaign for East Timorese independence. He proved to be an embarrassment to the Indonesial government and a major thorn in the side of ex-president Suharto. After returning to Indonesia in June this year Horta is convinced that the 30 August referendum was East Timor’s once-only chance to achieve independence and sort out its own problems.

The referendum

In the months preceding the referendum, tens of thousands of East Timorese fled into the jungles and mountains to escape the violence that rocked the capital Dili.

Human rights groups feared that a free and fair referendum could not be held because of the violence. Gusmao called for an armed peace-keeping force to quell the violence. But the Indonesian authorities rejected this. It was feared that the pro-integration militias were being armed and encouraged by the Indonesian military to heighten tension and to intimidate the pro-independence groups.

Although the run-up to the referendum was violent and left many people dead, the referendum itself was peaceful, with an astonishing 98.6 percent turnout of voters. Out of a total population of 800,000 about 600,000 were eligible to vote but only 450,000 had registered. The rival militia groups had called a truce to allow voting to proceed smoothly. This enabled the people who had fled to the jungles and the mountains to return to their homes and vote.

On the day following the voting, however, pro-Indonesian militias armed with guns and machetes, sensing a landslide defeat at the ballot box, came on the streets once again. They created a disturbance outside the UN headquarters. A teenager was shot and hacked to death.

According to UN spokesman, John Wimhurst, Joel Lopez Gomes, a Timorese UN worker was killed and two others were reported missing and 150 others were virtually held hostage when pro-Indonesian militias stormed a UN helicopter that was carrying ballot boxes from Ermera to Dili.

Armed anti-independence groups surrounded the airport and set up roadblocks to prevent East Timorese from leaving until the results of the referendum were known. They were suspicious of the activities of the United Nations Mission in East Timor (UNMET) which they said had encouraged East Timorese to break away from Indonesia.

The role of the UN

In UNMET, the UN fielded one of the smallest operations of its kind in the UN’s history, and also one of the weakest. Consequently, much of the organisation of the referendum vote depended on the co-operation of the Indonesian authorities. Nevertheless, it was clear that the UN had received very little of what was promised by the Indonesians when the New York peace agreement was signed in May this year.

The cost to the East Timorese people has already been high. They have been threatened, beaten and fired at. Their homes have been burnt. Many have lost their lives. If the UN’s gamble in going ahead with the referendum fails, that cost could be a great deal higher in the months to come.

The UN-supervised referendum itself went off peacefully and if it has succeeded in settling the East Timor conflict it will have done so at less cost and in much less time than most other UN operations. The anti-independence groups have vented their anger on the UN staff, journalists and foreign reporters who they felt were sympathetic to the cause of East Timorese independence.

Despite these difficulties, much has been achieved in a very short space of time. The unexpectedly large numbers who registered to vote revealed a fierce determination among the East Timorese to decide their own future.

The future

The remarkably high voter turnout at the 30 August referendum points to a substantial pro-independence majority. But the anti-independence groups, who seem to have the tacit support of sections of the Indonesian army, appear to be determined to foil the expressed wishes of the majority. The Indonesian police have been silent spectators of the violence directed against those who may have voted for independence.

The answer to what lies ahead rests to a large extent with Indonesia, which can control the militias if it chooses. But Indonesia is itself in an unstable transition; the Suharto dictatorship fell more than a year ago; and what will take its place is not yet entirely clear.

President B. J. Habibie, a transitional leader, agreed to hold a referendum, recognising that Indonesia was being harmed by the repressive tactics needed to hold East Timor against its will, and by the resulting bad publicity abroad. But elements of the government and military may not have made their peace with his decision.

With mounting tension and armed pro-Indonesia militia rampaging in the streets of Dili, president Habibie has said that he might be open to the deployment of a United Nations peace-keeping force. When the verdict of the crucial 30 August referendum is announced next week, such a force may be the only way of arresting a dangerous and deteriorating situation.

The relevance of Ananda Coomaraswamy as we enter the 21st century

THE ANNUAL ANANDA COOMARASWAMY MEMORIAL ORATION 1999, THE INDIAN CULTURAL CENTRE, SRI LANKA

21st AUGUST 1999

There is a growing consensus among intellectuals worldwide that Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy is the finest contribution Sri Lanka has made to this planet’s intellectual culture in the last 100 years.

I will not dwell on Coomaraswamy long. He would not have approved. I quote a letter he wrote in May 1946 from the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, Massachusetts to a Mr. Durai Raja Singam of Malaya who wanted to be his biographer:

Dear Mr. Durai Singham:

I must explain that I am not at all interested in biographical matter relating to myself and that I consider the Modern practice of publishing details about the lives and personalities of well-known men is nothing but a vulgar catering to illegitimate curiosityÉ I shall be grateful if you will publish nothing but the barest facts about myself. What you should deal with is the nature and tendency of my work, and your book should be 95% on this. I wish to remain in the background, and shall not be grateful or flattered by any details about myself or my life, all that is anicca, and as the "wisdom of India" should have taught you, "portraiture of human beings is asvargya". All this is not a matter of "modesty" but one of principle.

So be it. Briefly then, here is the 5%. A. K. Coomaraswamy’s father was Sir Muthu Coomaraswamy a Vellala Tamil from Jaffna, Sri Lanka who married Elizabeth Beeby an Englishwoman. Ananda was their only child and he was born in Lanka on 22nd August 1877. His father died when Ananda was less then two years of age and he was raised by his mother in England.

In all he wrote some 800 papers and articles in a period from 1908 to 1947. He lived in Sri Lanka from 1902 to 1905, which marked a period of transformation for him. His monumental work Mediaeval Sinhalese Art was written at this time.

He returned to England in 1907 and moved between India and England till 1917 and finally he settled down in the United States of America till the time of his death, on 9th September 1947.

Today’s lecture is based on an early Coomaraswamy article. This will take up 95% of our time. I refer to: Individuality. Autonomy and Function, the last essay from The Dance of Shiva, Fourteen Indian Essays, published in 1924, Individuality is sva-bhava; Autonomy is sva-rajya; and Function is sva-dharma.

What relevance does Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy have to us ‘moderns’ and post moderns as we enter the coming millennium?

Lenin has stated that "above all, let us have clarity of thought."

What was it that Coomaraswamy represented? He called it by many names. The Perennial Philosophy, the Sanatana or Akalika Dharma, the Lex Eterna. All his mature writings reflect this perspective. To children of Bharatha Mala, Coomaraswamy was a Rishi, a Seer a Wise Man. A man who reaffirms the eternal principle.

I have chosen one of Coomaraswamy’s earlier articles as the basis of this talk because, I have to talk. Individuality, Autonomy and Function was written when Coomaraswamy was still a nationalist and finding his feet. If I were to talk on his mature writings I would have to do so in parables or remain silent. There would be no oration at all. Coomaraswamy’s mature writings mostly concern metaphysics and Symbolism — matters that are secred and therefore secretÉ

On the other hand this early article reflects our present predicament as a people. This article is more relevant today than when it was first published in 1924. Unfolding events since it was written have proven Coomaraswamy right. I want to use the idealism and wisdom of the young Coomaraswamy to bring into focus the seriousness of the problems that face us. To provide each one of us with good and sufficient reason to think seriously and to take the internal and external action needed to preserve our cultural heritage. Which is to say our own futures, and those of our children and children’s children.

We must reflect upon ‘government’, which is not the same thing as ‘politics’, although politics affects government. The Buddha and today’s scientists have one thing in common É that they both recognize and proclaim that there is no effect without cause. Everything that we see about us, anything that we can think of, without exception, is the effect of its own set of causes. Violence, hatred, division are all effects with their own causes. As are cooperation and amity. We do not believe that any sensible person would agree that an effect can arise without its own cause. Some causes have positive effects, some very negative. We must all clearly see the difference between the two — or we are like blind men sailing a ship. If we don’t know what is a good wind and what is a bad wind for us; how can we find the harbour?

We call this discrimination. To know what is the path and what is not the path. This is true science and true science is eternal. I have mentioned science because I am employing the law of cause and effect. This was once common sense common to all.

Ananda Coomaraswamy uses this traditional knowledge to impart to us westernized orientals a new insight into the present political and social problems which are of most concern to us: Autonomy, Human Rights, and Social Integration of disparate groups. These involve the very principle of government, namely the exercise of rulership.

Let us borrow a concept from modern physics, and apply it to the socio-political situation in Sri Lanka, and in the areas with which we are most concerned at present: India and the Middle East. The concept we are borrowing is called relativity. It has to do with frames of reference. That is, the mental position from which we see ourselves and others. Let us call them Systems which exist relative to one another. For example — the frame of reference of the Muslim community is different relatively speaking to the frame of reference of the Kandyan agricultural community. The principle which we are applying makes clear that no one can claim to be absolutely right with regard to all the other frames. Unless of course, he is a Buddha, a Logos or a Prophet. For anyone else, the most they could claim is a relatively valid view of other frames. Wisdom however, is the understanding of the total interactive system. Of course, all frames of reference have much in common. These things that they do have in common may be called constant proportions, and they apply in all social-inertial frames of reference. Just as the speed of light is constant in all physical frames of reference. But in fact, while the constants seem to unify, it is the differences that separate.

Here then, in Sri Lanka, we have the many different communities of the Island. Each with it own hopes and fears. It’s own goals and aspirations. And often sadly, each with its own aggressions and hatreds. If we look deeply within, we will see that none of us is free of these things when our deepest and most cherished beliefs, our cultures, seem threatened or endangered. This instinct to defend is true throughout Nature. Social scientists call it The Territorial Imperative. The defence of one’s territory is instinctive. Each of our communities is in this way completely different from the others. And this is good, since it provides us with a cultural richness and diversity that benefits us all. When we link all this together we find the things that unite us. Such constant proportions as rice and curry, our mutual love of our Motherland or a wish for peace and tranquillity, family relationships and admiration for aspects of each other’s cultures. Indeed, many many things.

Now, what is the role of government in all of this? In great measure it is to balance all of these factors...to harmonize them in perfect co-operation toward the agreed aims. So, generally, although perhaps not perfectly a government exercises rulership by what is called popular mandate. A consensus between the communities is arrived at within a political party. If that party comes to power it attempts to implement the consensus arrived at and on the basis of that implementation alone, has what is generally regarded as, "the right to rule". This is sometimes interpreted as the duty to rule - no matter what. That is the government acting on behalf of one or more communal frames of reference seeks to impose the majority rule by force over another communal frame of reference. This is the way of the Dictator É the tyrant whose only arm of policy is violence against all dissent. This must never be our way - Never the way of an enlightened society.

This does not mean that the government should not defend its own conceptual foundations with armed force É if one or more of the other frames of reference are subjected to armed attacks at the point of a gun. This is roughly the situation as it obtains at the moment.

Tyranny

The social sciences tell us that the repudiation of tyranny must ultimately involve the repudiation of majority rule. The reason that majority rule is rejected can only mean that the seceding communal frame of reference is seeking autonomy. That is, freedom to run its own affairs entirely, independent of any other community in the nation. It feels that there can be no entirely just solution to its special interest problems without this autonomy. If we ponder this for a moment, it becomes clear that this is no less true for nations in this day and age than it is for the individual.

In light of this, we must take into consideration the evolving concept of Human Rights. From an existing nation it is possible for communal groups to arrive at individual autonomy in two ways É either by revolt against the rule of the majority or by entering into autonomous co-operation with the other communities É on the basis of pure self-interest. Ultimately, if each frame of reference desires autonomy, we have the beginning of a social disintegration sanctioned by the very diversity of interests and individual freedoms which any enlightened democratic government must assert, nurture and cause to grow. By these I mean the virtues and skills inherent in each community, which are of benefit to all. Government, as a model, should want true Islamic culture to grow É so that its virtues may benefit and bless us all. This does not mean that this government is pro-Muslim at the expense of other communities. Likewise, with Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism etc... all should grow and flourish and be recognized through both ‘fruit and flower’.

This can only occur when the various frames of reference lose their fear and more importantly, mutual suspicion of each other. This then, is the paradox É government can do nothing else other than rule, upholding that right by force if necessary. But wise government knows that it cannot rule or keep in subjection by force of arms any cultural group without creating an unstable equilibrium in the whole fabric of society. This instability will become the rule rather than the exception.

In these days of modern light arms É often given to children É "communal self-ascertain built on limited self-interest, however seemingly justified, leads to the anarchy of chaos É The very opposite of ‘good’ government!" Indeed, the very opposite of any government all, comes to govern! This is the present situation in the North, in certain areas of the East and in Colombo as well; with suicide bombers lurking even around Cinnamon Gardens.

This type of disintegration will not stop here. According to Coomaraswamy, the opposite of all of this social distintegration É the path to reintegration can only be founded on the common identity of interests of all our communities.

The countries of Europe, by way of illustration, deadly enemies for centuries, with far more trouble than ourselves, have founded the European Union because they have the wisdom to recognize their own best interests. These lie at the opposite pole to war, chaos and conflict. Europe knows war — Thank God, so far we in Sri Lanka only know about it. Twenty-thousand British soldiers died during the first hour of the Battle for the Somme, there were Two million deaths in all É for a field of mud. Having had these experiences Europeans have chosen peace and co-operation among themselves. This is truly wise — and in its own way, quite magnificent determination of future destiny, on the part of this most influential continent.

If we are to follow this path we must first understand ourselves, not as a multi-communal nation but as a multi-cultural nation.

This is the planet Earth.

And here we are.

An Island Nation called Sri Lanka.

We are a multi-cultural society and we are in the year 1999, with the year 2000 just four months away.

This is the reality.

We must go into the future as we are — not as we might like to be.

Among ourselves, we do have a common identity of interests É and we do have a common unifying philosophy within which to assert these interests. The traditional Sri Lankan art of living with its special attitude towards land, water, and air is still a living heritage. This is what we must build on, according to Coomaraswamy. There is nothing at all at this moment to prevent us recognizing these common interests and there is nothing to prevent us from co-operating to achieve them.

Co-operation is not government. Let us suppose that no one community expects to receive from the other communities something for nothing. This is certainly the case in Europe..... what Americans call the ‘bottom line’. Even with this jaundiced view, the principle of mutual aid and co-operation will permit each one to fulfil best its own ideal function in the greater community. It will find its place naturally.

So there we have it again the paradox Coomaraswamy describes, Only Government based on conscious co-operation, and not the will to govern others, can create a stable equilibrium! The "will to govern" must not be confused with the "will to power." The "will to govern" is the "will to govern others." The "will to power" is the will to govern oneself. Those who wish to be free should have the "will to power" without the "will to govern." In this context, according to Coomaraswamy, everyone who believes in the self-determination of national groups is an anarchist.

However, a state of entire liberty can never be attained because the "will to govern" can never be totally eradicated. But we must never cease to keep the ideal in mind and avoid the pitfalls of mistaking our communal force for that which is best in us. Our true spirit.

We all know what is meant by a show of force. It is easy to confuse our force with our spirit. They are not the same. Devoid of spirit, communal force becomes fascism, which then tries to destroy whatever of the spirit is still left in those of other cultures and beliefs. Nazi Germany is a very good case to point, where this actually happened in our own lifetimes.

Against all of these nightmares we have only one defence, the ability to freely use our vote intelligently to change things harmoniously, and without the disruption of our social fabric. All that threatens this basic human right is someone with a gun who is willing to kill those who hold to this path. Freedom does not come from the barrel of a gun. But, oppression does recoil through the barrel of a gun — upon whoever is holding it.

Goodwill

Let us look away from Sri Lanka for a moment to the outside World. For we are connected to it, and events there must influence us here. There is a possibility of a severe breakdown of communal relationships within our great neighbour India. It may well be that they will need our help and goodwill in aiding their great Union to remain in being. If we look father North, to the Middle East É here to the signs are for stormy weather, which like India’s troubles must effect us. These are legitimate concerns for a all of us. There are over 500,000 Sri Lankans living and working in these areas, with thousands of families here dependent upon them there. Whatever government is in power in Sri Lanka must make contingency plans against a worst case scenario. This is a duty incumbent upon it. It is also highly likely that oil will become scarce and expensive if the producers in the Middle East are swept up in war. We must spread our energy requirements in such a way that we will be less dependent on any one supplier or method to ecologically and sustainably guarantee our future needs. There is also the strong possibility of the collapse of the World Monetary System É or at least some severe shock to it, the consequences of which are difficult to predict. Clean water is also going to get expensive and unaffordable. Traditional methods of rice cultivation are being abandoned in favour of sugar cane, tobacco and other export crops. With them will disappear an entire culture and its particular lifestyle. There is also extreme and growing unrest in Control America and other parts of South America, And of course there is Africa. The competition for our raw materials and resources, that is the resources of the so-called. ‘Third World’, is also likely to breed considerable aggression among the competitors. Competition changes behaviour. We must always remember this.

There are parallels to be drawn between our predicament and that of Central and South America. These two Americas form a huge continent, which from the 16th to the 18th century was largely dominated by Spain. One man led a revolt against Spain in Central and South America. His name was Simon De Bolivar and the country of Bolivia is named after him. Simon De Bolivar was perhaps the greatest revolutionary general that ever lived. He almost single handedly defeated the might of the Spanish Empire, mighty indeed at that time. He did this all over that vast continent... not just in one small country. It was a war of horror, of massacres and bloodshed beyond belief with no quarter asked or given by either side. It went on for years and years, then one day finally, Simon De Bolivar and his comrades had won their battle. They set about the task of transforming South America into one great nation to be called Gram Columbia. It was a task that proved impossible and as is so often the case, the great revolutionary Simon De Bolivar was forced to flee for his life to exile in the United States. There he sat down and wrote a book. His account of the struggle and the lessons he had learned from it. In his summary he listed four points and the first was this: ‘He who makes revolution ploughs the ocean’. Second: ‘This country (South America) is ungovernable by people like ourselves.’ Third: ‘There is no political system or experiment that will not find a place here, they will all appear and pass away like orchids in the forests...’ There was a fourth point, but I cannot remember what it was; I read the book a long time ago. How many of today’s leaders have done Simon De Bolivar the honour of studying his summaries? Perhaps this is not a part of their scholarship.

There is an old saying by another South American, George Santayana, ‘That those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.’ I believe that forgetting Bolivar’s experience is an example of the kind of forgetfulness that Santayana warns about.

Here and abroad the same racio-religious and ideological dynamics are at work. In the middle of all this, here we are. We are being affected and will continue to be affected by these factors. For us the future must start from this moment. It is going to be born whether we will it or not and we have no idea what this new baby is going to look like. To bring it into being we must see our minds... and the best parts of us. To build secure foundations the work we must do is first internal, on ourselves, to get rid of our hatreds, aggressions and suspicions. All religions have techniques for doing this and all are valid.

We must remember that there is no more hard and difficult work than the purification of our own minds and behaviour towards one another. There is no other way to arrive at our goal. Let us first study that which unites us. Let us build on that. For us from Kailash to Kataragama (often called Southern Kailash) there is one cultural pattern, this pattern dictates our way of life. We have for too long substituted Suddang Saranang Gatchami for Buddhang Saranang Gatchami. Consequently, we are fighting each other with borrowed ideas, monies and guns. As we enter the twenty first century do we, an ancient and wise culture, stand empty handed? Is our contributioon to global self expression ignorance? What has happened to the Wisdom of India? The wisdom of Lanka? Is Coomaraswamy only preserved in the pages of a book that is pulled annually from a dusty shelf? If we understand our heritage we will live it and not just talk about it or write about it. "To know the tradition, live the tradition." How do we live the tradition when traditional lifestyles are being destroyed as they are considered an impediment to modern development? How do we protect that which we are studying? A traditional culture and knowledge of an ecologically sustainable way of life still exists in remote areas, uncontaminated by a mass mediated growth oriented consumer mentality. Isolation, neglect and war have protected these areas. To the people who live here modern civilization is the greatest terrorist. This culture must be recognized as an asset and protected not converted into a competitive monster. A return to peace could turn the entire North and the East of Sri Lanka or Eelam as some would have it into a market place for competing ideologies, goods and services. It will also signal the return of the international and local robber barons...

In this view Prabhakaran’s war, while destroying the economy and spilling the blood of our youth, is on the other hand protecting Lanka from the onslaught of commerce. From this perspective Prabhakaran the Destroyer becomes Prabhakaran the Preserver. As long as the war continues it is bad for any business other than arms and war-related business.

It seems the guardian deities of Lanka have their own ideas. This island is protected, so proclaim both the oral and written tradition. Do we need another Avataric descent to settle the issue of the Gem Set Throne of Lanka or do we start now with the best use of our minds? We are told that God responds to the quality of our imagination. That’s what we need today and that is what Coomaraswamy prescribes. Do we have the imagination? Can we reserve a small part of Lanka as a Living heritage Conservation Zone? An area sacred to all communities. A Sanctuary, where we can live the lifestyle that traditional wisdom teaches and prescribes...

There are caves in Lanka with the inscription ‘Dedicated to the Sangha of the Four Quarters of the World, Past, Present and Yet to Come...’ These pre-brahmi inscriptions predate the ideas of the ‘nation-state of Sri Lanka’ and the ‘Sinhala’ or ‘Tamil’ people.

We (Cultural Survival and the Kataragama Devotees Trust) were in this region a month ago — Kudumbigala, Okanda, Bovatagala and Kumana. We were moving with the Pada Yatra, the annual foot pilgrimage along the East Coast from Jaffna to Kataragama. We first walked this pilgrimage in 1971 and our teachers Yogaswami and Swami Gauribala had done so for many years before that and as a result we are well known in the region. This region we believe is ruled by Skanda-Murukan and his devotees have no fear. Before we enter the Yala East Park we come upon the forest village of Panama. Everyone in Panama knows that they are a mixture of both Sinhala and Tamil. They will even today laughingly tell you what a joke it all is. Common sense prevails. Common sense rules. It is incumbent upon all of us that we don’t convert these simple god-fearing people and their blessed surrounding into regions of conflict.

Let us all agree on just that... One small region of Lanka where we do not fight. This does not threaten anyone.

Enlightened self-interest demands that we retain a small part of Deviyange Kelle or ‘God’s own forest’ as the Kataragama God’s forest is called, for contemplation and not development. We need such a place to escape to from the jaws of materialism and the modern mentality. Let this be our sacred pledge for the millennium, our vision for the future. The vision we would like to be remembered for. That we will help preserve one small part of traditional Lanka as it is and treat it as Maturu Bhoomi... This is what the people of the region want.

We all know it is ‘going against the stream’ like the Blessed Ones Alms Bowl going up river, or the Water Cutting Ceremony at Kataragama.

Remember however, that life begins against the stream...

Always remember, that there are many worlds under the sun... each of them a small or a large world...

Often with its own rules, laws and status and its own particular way of looking at things... its own world view, if you wish.

A way of seeing the part, or the whole. Everyone is entitled to this.

We must all train ourselves to see the world in this special way — A Way that makes it meaningful and full of richness and more important full of truth, with infinite possibilities.

I conclude with the greetings and blessing of Skanda-Murukan, also known as Coomaraswamy the Eternal Youth.

HARO HARA!

For six years Cultural Survival presented the Annual Ananda Coomaraswamy Oration. We abandoned it because of the lack of speakers. After Ranjith Fernando’s brilliant inaugural lecture the quality of the contributions changed. Ranjith predicted that I asked the late President J. R. Jayewardene, the late Gamini Dissanayake and President Chandrika Kumaratunga to make the article I have spoken on the basis of their orations when they accepted Cultural Survival’s invitation. President J. R. wanted to use the occasion to document a period of history; Gamini did very well talking about Mahasammata (common consensus) and President Kumaratunga accepted the proposed subject but never turned up, cancelling at the last moment, after invitations had gone out. That was reason enough for us to give up our annual Colombo event. However, this preparation has helped me greatly in making this oration. Cultural Survival moved to the Wanni from the Taj Samudra 7 years ago to establish the Ulpotha Sanctuary for a private investor. This pioneering experiment with eco-tourism has attracted global media attention. We have now returned to the city to lobby for the recognition of the concept of Living Heritage Sanctuaries as our contribution to the United Nations Decade of Peace and Non-Violence, as we enter the 21st century. We are delighted that the Indian Cultural Centre has revived this annual celebration.

Manik Sandrasagra

  | NEWS | PROVINCIAL | EDITORIAL | DEFENCE | FEATURES | LEISURE | BUSINESS | SPORTS | ADS |