"A ridiculous or empty show"

"When formed in June 2006, the APRC was tasked to produce a report before the expected peace talks between the LTTE and the Government of Sri Lanka in the last week of October. When the 17-member panel of "Legal/Constitutional Experts" finally 'completed' its task, there were four separate, competing reports."

Comment by tamilnation.org Today, 22 years after the The Thimpu Talks - July/August 1985, the Sri Lanka government and its apologists (including Tissa Vitharne, Chair of the APRC) continue to regard genuine  'federalism' as the unmentionable F word.  And they (together with the 'international community') refuse to address the simple question: who is to federate with whom? After all 'to federate' (federare) is 'to associate' with one another. The stand of the current Sinhala political leadership (as well as the Sinhala opposition of  Ranil Wickremasinghe and Mangala Samaraweera) is no different from that which was enunciated by Dr. H.W. Jayawardene, the leader of the Sri Lankan government delegation to Thimpu:

"...it is clear that a political settlement of the Tamil question cannot be made either on the basis of the claim to be a separate nation or nationality distinct from other racial groups that are citizens of Sri Lanka or on the basis of a claim to be heirs to a territorially demarcated area styled the 'traditional homeland of the Tamils' transcending the provincial boundaries of the Northern and Eastern Provinces, since both such claims are inconsistent with and contradictory to a united nation..."

In the years since Thimpu, thousands of Tamils have died for no crime other than that they were Tamils and that they resisted Sinhala occupation of their homeland. Many have been tortured and raped for no reason other than that they were Tamils. Thousands have simply disappeared and many thousands more have been rendered homeless. We as a people have suffered and each Tamil family, without exception, will have their own particular experience of that suffering - to a lesser or greater degree. It is a pain and suffering that has  served to consolidate Tamil togetherness. It is a pain and suffering that has strengthened the will of a people to resist the occupation of their homeland by an alien  Sinhala army. And, it is a strength which prompts them to continue to say with patience and without rancour, that 'we, too, are a people' and that two independent nations may agree to associate with one another in freedom and in equality but they cannot be compelled to live together within the confines of a single state by force of arms..."

[see also 1. Self Determination & the 'Multi Ethnic Plural Society' - Nadesan Satyendra, 15 September 1993  "...In certain circles where a search is on for a solution to the armed conflict in the island, the oft repeated mantra is that Sri Lanka is a 'multi ethnic plural society'. It is a mantra which the Sri Lanka government has also found useful to chant from time to time. The mantra has a nice meditative ring to it. It conjures up the soothing vision of a society where all ethnic groups are equal and a plurality of view points is encouraged and secured. But mantras intended to resolve an armed political conflict, must fit the political reality on the ground..." more

2. The Parliamentary Select Committee Farce, November 1993 "The Sri Lanka Parliamentary Select Committee after labouring for more than two years, has not simply produced a mouse. It has also produced a structure to further Sinhala chauvinism's long held desire to divide the Tamil homeland..." more and

3. Thirteenth Amendment to Sri Lanka Constitution: - Devolution or Comic Opera, March 1988  "..It is difficult to discuss the provisions of the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lanka Constitution seriously - they are so impossibly burlesque and farcical. Yet, they have a serious aspect. They show that Sinhala chauvinism, like all chauvinisms in the same predicament, has made the time honoured, ineffectual effort to evade a settlement of the real question by throwing belated and unacceptable sops to Demogorgon..." more

4.Joint Response by Tamil Delegation At Thimphu Talks 17 August 1985 "..More than 50 years have passed since 1928 and we have moved from Provincial Councils to Regional Councils and from Regional Councils to District Councils and now from District Councils back to District/Provincial Councils. We have had the 'early consideration' of Mrs. Srimavo Bandaranaike and the 'earnest consideration' of the late Dudley Senanayake. There has been no shortage of Committees and Commissions, of reports and recommendations but that which was lacking was the political will to recognise the existence of the Tamil nation. And simultaneous with this process of broken pacts and dishonoured agreements, the Tamil people were subjected to an ever widening and deepening national oppression aimed at undermining the integrity of the Tamil nation..." more ]

---

All Party Representative Committee is dead, says UNP

[TamilNet, Thursday, 16 August 2007]
 

After the meeting of the All Party Representative Committee (APRC) on Constitutional Reforms on 14 August 2007 was abruptly halted and adjourned indefinitely due to demands from Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (MEP) members, and failed to "finalise a draft report by today to keep to a deadline set by the United National Party UNP," the opposition UNP spokesperson said the "APRC process is dead in the water," the Morning Leader reported in the Wednesday edition.

"The sudden decision to move for an adjournment yesterday came following representations made by the JHU to the President Monday night. The SLFP and MEP representatives to the APRC, Minister Vishwa Warnapala and Nalin de Silva, had informed Chairman Tissa Vitharana that the proceedings had to be adjourned in keeping with a request made by the President," the Morning Leader said.

While the UNP said "they have been proved correct that the entire APRC process was an eye wash," the APRC chairman, in a tactic supporting the accusations by political analysts that the APRC is only "about being seen to be doing something and about buying time," told Reuters in an interview Wednesday that "a raft of Sri Lankan political parties has reached broad consensus on a cross-party devolution proposal," and that "he aimed to complete a draft and hand it over to [Sri Lanka's] President Mahinda Rajapaksa by the end of next week."

"The APRC had a series of meetings during the last two weeks to finalise its report before August 15. The APRC had by a majority view taken the position that the unit of devolution should be the province and the nature of the state should be "united" as opposed to unitary. The parties that supported these positions were the UNP, LSSP, CP, CWC, UPF, SLMC and NUA.

"The SLFP, MEP and the JHU had opposed the majority position," the Morning Leader said.

When formed in June 2006, the APRC was tasked to produce a report before the expected peace talks between the LTTE and the Government of Sri Lanka in the last week of October. When the 17-member panel of "Legal/Constitutional Experts" finally 'completed' its task, there were four separate, competing reports. The reports, leaked to the media in December, triggered controversy.

In early March, Vitarana, a respected Left politician, said the consensual APRC proposal, which was hoped to be ready by February, had been delayed because of the ruling Sri Lanka Freedom Party's (SLFP) delay in submitting its proposals.

On 22nd March, the Minister said he wants the "exercise to be completed over the next 60 days," again moving the deadline to end of May.

The JVP, which is third largest political party represented in parliament with 39 parliamentarians, boycotted the APRC since early December saying it is not interested in formulating a political package based on a federal concept to solve the crisis.

Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), all monks' party said in February that it will not table its proposals to the All Party Representatives Committee (APRC) to find a political solution to the ethnic conflict. JHU reasoned that Mahinda Chinthanaya mandates a solution on the basis of unitary concept of constitution and therefore no alternate proposals are necessary.

Dr Saravanamuttu predicted the destiny of the APRC effort earlier pointing to the inclusion of "most prominent and consistent ant-federalists like H.L. de Silva" in the expert panel, and said "the balance of power of opinion and bias on the committee may result in the whole exercise being yet another one of futility." He questioned: "Is the primary consideration here the transformation of the conflict or is it about keeping potential critics on board ?"

Rajapakse and ruling party Ministers also tried to introduce the Panchayati Raj concept, a third tier village level administrative arrangement into the Sri Lanka devolution debate in October 2006, touting it as “ray of hope” to solve Sri Lanka’s “domestic problems.”

Gajendrakumar responded that "Panchayati Raj was enacted mainly to promote grass-root level democracy, to empower poor women, and to enable feudally-strapped residents of rural India to participate in the world's largest democracy," indicating that this will receive total rejection from Tamils who at best are seeking a viable alternative to secession.

With UNP's pronouncement that "APRC is dead," the only path alive that was pursuing a political solution to Sri Lanka's conflict has been closed. But the APRC Chairman appears to think the deliberations might still continue.