http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2009/06/12/a-home-grown-solution-for-unity-or-to-implement-13-amendment-to-perpetrate-ethnic-difference/ Lankaweb.com Sat, 20 Mar 2010 05:51:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2009/06/12/a-home-grown-solution-for-unity-or-to-implement-13-amendment-to-perpetrate-ethnic-difference/comment-page-1/#comment-155 cassandra Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:24:38 +0000 http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/?p=1401#comment-155 It is indeed appropriate that we re-visit the matter of the 13th Amendment, in light of various factors. - The 13th Amendment was forced on SL by India. It was agreed to under duress and is therefore voidable. - It has not been implemented after more than 20 years and surely lapsed - Circumstances since 1983 have changed significantly and therefore the underlying considerations for the Amendment are no longer valid - It was part of a larger agreement which included the LTTE laying down arms. That did not happen. - The 13th Amendment will arguably confer on the Tamils living in the North and the East more rights than other citizens of the country It is also interesting to note that measures proposed to deal with 'Tamil grievances' have always sought to go beyond redressing those grievances. The Satyagraha in the 1950s was in protest at the Sinhala Only Act which made Sinhalese the sole official language. But the B-C pact (later abrogated) which was entered into to bring that protest to an end, went way beyond giving Tamil parity of status with Sinhalese. The pact went on to deal with District Councils and colonisation etc. So did the Dudley-Chelvanayagam agreement. So does the 13th Amendment. The grievance of the Tamils has been alleged discrimination on the basis of language. The answer to that grievance needs to be proportionate to that grievance - no more. With the defeat of the LTTE, we are living in a totally different world. We need a solution that reflects those changed circumstances and one that is appropriate to Sri Lanka, not a duplication of something valid and relevant to other countries. It is indeed appropriate that we re-visit the matter of the 13th Amendment, in light of various factors.
- The 13th Amendment was forced on SL by India. It was agreed to under duress and is therefore voidable.
- It has not been implemented after more than 20 years and surely lapsed
- Circumstances since 1983 have changed significantly and therefore the underlying considerations for the Amendment are no longer valid
- It was part of a larger agreement which included the LTTE laying down arms. That did not happen.
- The 13th Amendment will arguably confer on the Tamils living in the North and the East more rights than other citizens of the country
It is also interesting to note that measures proposed to deal with ‘Tamil grievances’ have always sought to go beyond redressing those grievances. The Satyagraha in the 1950s was in protest at the Sinhala Only Act which made Sinhalese the sole official language. But the B-C pact (later abrogated) which was entered into to bring that protest to an end, went way beyond giving Tamil parity of status with Sinhalese. The pact went on to deal with District Councils and colonisation etc. So did the Dudley-Chelvanayagam agreement. So does the 13th Amendment. The grievance of the Tamils has been alleged discrimination on the basis of language. The answer to that grievance needs to be proportionate to that grievance – no more.
With the defeat of the LTTE, we are living in a totally different world. We need a solution that reflects those changed circumstances and one that is appropriate to Sri Lanka, not a duplication of something valid and relevant to other countries.

]]>