Posted on October 17th, 2016


Continuing my discussion of the idiocies in the Sri Lanka Constitution, in this article I focus on the concept, ‘Sovereignty is in the People’ enshrined in Article 3, purportedly the source from which the constitution draws its legal and moral authority.

I shall briefly discuss what I see as the logical contradiction at the heart of this concept, explain what I think are the present ambitions of the Tamil separatists, and finally, explain the legal consequences if the new constitution gives the Tamils more control over the North and the East, and at some time the Tamils demand a referendum on secession.


The first question to ask is, ‘What does the phrase, ‘In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable’ (Article 2) really mean?’  The ‘People’ of Sri Lanka consists of roughly twenty million citizens.  Therefore, for the said phrase to make logical sense, it must mean that sovereignty is in each of those 20 million citizens, or to put it another way each of those citizens shares equally in the said sovereignty.

The point is that each citizen has a claim to—which is to say owns—a particular fraction of the sovereignty of the country.  It is generally recognized in the law that the right to alienate is an intrinsic attribute of ownership.  Therefore, the notion that in Sri Lanka sovereignty is inalienable must be understood as meaning that sovereignty is inalienable by anyone or anything other than by the People themselves.

The above means that, the only way to alienate sovereignty is if each citizen personally and voluntarily relinquishes their portion of the sovereignty in question.  Now, let’s consider the glaring contradiction regarding this concept found in the constitution itself.

Article 83 sets out the entrenched Articles of the Constitution (in order to amend or repeal an entrenched Article one needs 2/3 majority in Parliament plus a referendum).  Not surprisingly, Article 3 heads that list.  So, in order to amend or repeal Article 3, it requires both a 2/3 majority in Parliament, plus a referendum.

How does one win a referendum under our constitution?  According to Article 85(3), all that is required is an absolute majority of the valid votes cast at the referendum.  So, with a 2/3 majority in Parliament, and 50% +1  majority at a referendum it is possible to change or repeal Article 3, or any provision in the constitution where Article 3 is a factor.

To make a long story short, with 2/3 majority in Parliament, plus a 50% + 1 win at a referendum, it is possible to alienate the sovereignty of 49.9 percept of the population, sovereignty which is supposedly inalienable!

In my view, if Article 3 is to make logical sense, it should read:  ‘In the Republic of Sri Lanka at any given time sovereignty is in 50% + 1 of the People, and is alienable.’  What does this mean in terms of the constitution as a whole?  It means that, as matters stand, the constitution is based on a lie:  Sri Lankans have been living a lie for the last 40 years.


When the war ended, many Sri Lankans especially Sinhala-Buddhists thought that their headache with respect to Tamil separatism was also over.  Unfortunately, this was not the case.  The separatists are a resourceful bunch, and they started plotting their comeback almost as soon as the smoke of the battlefield cleared.

The future plan of the separatists was spelt out candidly and boldly in 2012 by one of their most senior members, R. Sampanthan, at that time the ‘Leader’ of both the TNA as well as the Illangai Tamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK) under which all TNA candidates contest elections.  In his speech at the 14th Annual Convention of the ITAK held in Batticaloa, he said inter alia:

‘The softening of our stance concerning certain issues, and the compromise we show in other issues, are diplomatic strategies to ensure that we do not alienate the international community.  They are not indications that we have abandoned our fundamental objectives.’[1]

He also said:

‘The current practices of the international community may give us an opportunity to achieve, without the loss of life, the soaring aspirations we were unable to achieve by armed struggle.’[2]

If the option of an ‘armed struggle’ is eliminated (and Sampanthan himself is conceding this) then the only way to achieve the same goal as the ‘armed struggle,’ i.e. Eelam, is either by way of a referendum of the Tamils in the North and East, or by action of one or more of the Provincial Councils.

In order for a Provincial Councils to affect a unilateral secession it is necessary that the relationship between the Center and the Provinces be that of a confederation and that is obviously an unrealistic goal in the Sri Lankan context.  So, the remaining option is to go for a referendum.

Until almost the beginning of 2016 Mr. Sampanthan and other stalwarts among the separatists, including Mr. Karunanidhi their bastion of support in Tamil Nadu, explicitly called for a referendum on secession.[3] But, they are at present silent on the subject.  However, the fact that Sampanthan and his immediate cohorts are silent on the topic of a referendum does not mean that their overall plan has changed.

The proof of the above is in the latest statement released by V. Rudhrakumaran, the notorious separatist operating out of the United States.  In an interview published in the Huffington Post among other places, he says inter alia:

‘If you look at the peace efforts around the world, the most common mechanism introduced and supported by the international community to resolve national questions has been the holding of a referendum.  In the case of Kosovo, in spite of the parent state Serbia’s opposition, the international community decided that only through a referendum could national conflict be resolved.  We expect the UN or any state power which is keen to solve the national question in Sri Lanka to propose and support a referendum as the central feature in negotiating a political solution.  The referendum proposed by us contains all options such as ‘unitary,’ ‘federal state,’ ‘unitary framework with federal features,’ ad ‘independent state.’[4]

To digress a moment, the following part of the interview is also important, because it gives an idea of the tactics one might expect from the separatists in the near future, and also the new scheme of devolution that might appear in the new constitution:

‘Q:       Short of a separate state, is there a power-sharing arrangement that would satisfy you?  If so, would you talk a little abut what that might look like?’

‘A:       Due to the rigid ethnocratic nature of the Sri Lankan state, we believe only an independent state can provide dignity and security for the Tamils.  For an interim period, the Interim Self Governing Authority (ISGA) previously proposed by the LTTE could be the basis for a power-sharing arrangement.  The ISGA was received positively at the time by the U.S. and the E.U. among others.’

‘Under the proposed ISGA, human right, secularism, the separation of powers, etc. will be guaranteed.  It also provided for both the Sinhalese and Muslims in the Northeast to be members of this body.  The ISGA specifically emphasized that the Muslim community had the right to participate in the formulation of a role in the ISGA.’

‘However, I want to emphasize that any type of political resolution would be based on the people’s will to be ascertained through a referendum.’[5]

In short, if Sri Lankans especially Sinhala-Buddhists think that once the new constitution is enacted it will mollify the separatists, they are sadly mistaken.  The moment the new constitution is enacted, the separatists will begin the next phase of their attack, i.e. the clamour for the referendum:  the raucous din for Eelam will not abate, it will only grow.

In my view, the fact that the separatists have gone to such lengths to have their ideas published in a relatively high-profile magazine such as Huffington Post, at this particular point in time, indicates that they are confident their primary goals will be achieved with the enactment of the new constitution, and they are ‘loading up’ for the next phase.  (Notice for instance that, as if on cue, Wigneswaran’s ‘Elugu Tamils’ have entered the scene.)

To return, it is generally accepted in international law that there are 3 elements to a claim of self-determination:  historical self-governance in an identifiable territory, a distinct culture and national will, and capacity to govern.  If the new constitution devolves power beyond what is already the case, for instance, if it dilutes in any way the control that the central government at present has over the Provinces, the separatists will be in a position to claim all three of the aforesaid elements.

There is much talk in the Sri Lankan media these days about whether the new constitution will introduce a federal form of government to this country.  In my view, talk of federalism is a complete distraction.   The separatists don’t need federalism to get to their ‘Eelam’:  all they need is to show the international community that they have been ‘governing’ an identified territory in Sri Lanka for some time.

(In my view, with a modified version of the 13th Amendment, for instance with the subjects in the Reserved List reduced, the Provincial List increased, and the Concurrent List either reduced or eliminated, they will be able to do the above.)


I anticipate that, Article 2 (‘unitary’ status of the country) will not be touched.  In other words, whatever new arrangement of devolution is introduced, it will be called a ‘unitary’ system.  So, the only way to challenge the new system if at all is under Article 3, i.e. as a violation of the sovereignty of the country.  I agree that, there are a number of options available under this head, but I will not discuss them here.

The point is this:  even if the new scheme of devolution is successfully challenged in the Supreme Court, the most that will happen is that the court will order the new scheme to be put to a referendum also.  But, as I pointed out earlier, a 50% +1 majority is all that is needed to win a referendum, and it appears the Government is confidant it can marshal that kind of support.

To digress a moment, Mr. Lal Wijenayaka, one of the architects of the new constitution, has explained how the government expects to win a referendum, as follows:

‘Q:       What about the public support at a referendum?’

‘A:       It would be there as long as the two main parties are together,  In case Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) is divided, the divided section with the government would get at least half of its vote base.  The TNA would fall in line.  Janatha Vimukhi Peramna (JVP) would also do the same.’[6]

I have no doubt that Mr. Wijenayake is correct in his assessment.  Where does this leave the Sinhala-Buddhists?  Unfortunately, in the unenviable position of having to look on helplessly as their country is taken from them.  There is much talk these days especially among the Sinhala-Buddhists that what is happening is a repeat of what happened in 1815 with the Kandyan Convention.

The truth is that, what is about to happen is much worse than the Kandyan Convention.  In that Convention, the Sinhala nobles handed over sovereignty of the country to the British:  there was no question of the People handing over sovereignty to the British, because the People at that time did not have any such sovereignty to begin with.

The present situation is completely different:  sovereignty is now purportedly in the People.  So, if at a referendum the People endorse an expanded devolution of power, an expansion that can conceivably lead to a division of the country, it will be a gift outright that the People will find very difficult to question, renounce, or reject in the future.

Unfortunately, because of the contradiction at the very heart of the concept ‘sovereignty is in the People’ as set out in our constitution, even if 50%+1 of the People endorse the aforesaid gift, it will bind the rest also.  The irony not to mention tragedy of it all is that this will happen as a result of a constitution brought by the Sinhalas themselves.

There are some rudimentary safeguards that can still protect the interests of the Sinhala-Buddhists, as well as that of the country.  For instance, the term Unitary’ can be defined in the constitution itself, and a specific clause also inserted to prohibit anyone from calling for a referendum for purposes of secession.  What are the chances any such thing will be done in the new constitution?  In my view, ‘none.’

Dharshan Weerasekera is an Attorney-at-Law.  His latest book, The Relevance of American Constitutional Principles to Solving Problems of Governance in Sri Lanka, will be in bookstores shortly.

[1] ‘Text of Presidential Address of R. Sampanthan at the 14th Annual National Convention of ITAK in Batticaloa,’, 27 May 2012

[2] Ibid

[3] For instance see, ‘Sampathan goes Scottish,’ Maneksha, Ceylon Today, 30 January 2016,, and also, ‘M. Karunanidhi bats for referendum in Sri Lanka to end woes of Tamils,’ The Economic Times, 12 September 2013,

[4] ‘A Tamil Diaspora Perspective on Sri Lanka,’ Taylor Dibbert, Huffington Post, 13 October 1016,

[5] Ibid.

[6] ‘Sri Lanka already a Secular State – Lal Wijenayake,’ Kelum Bandara, Daily Mirror, 5 October 2016


  1. Sirih Says:

    SL constitution was developed or created to agendas of SLFP and UNP and whole document is a insult to the nation and its people.
    I do agree that we need a brand new constitution with proper check and balances with independent institutions that report to the parliament and with ombudsman system, so that independent umpires can check abuses that happening today.

    Would we see a real document? , I would say no since almost upper politicos are lawyers and they are the problem since they will never allow proper judicial system.

  2. Dilrook Says:

    Glad Dharshan brought the Batticaloa Resolution (2012) to the discussion. This was suppressed by the media but spells out Tamil separatist road map very clearly.

    On the matter of sovereignty, it gets even more complicated. Elsewhere in the Constitution it says sovereignty is exercised by the parliament. If so, why cannot the parliament change provincial boundaries and change provincial powers without consulting the provinces (stated elsewhere in the constitution)? It means sovereignty is also exercised by provincial councils not just the parliament!

    So exercise of sovereignty has already been “devolved” to provinces under 13A. Since sovereignty is in the people as an inalienable right, putting the two together within the provincial framework completes the self determination requirement.

    However, I disagree that Tamil Eelam is the end goal of Tamils for the moment. They are after entire Eelam. Tamils are after creating a new extortion tool making use of their “right of self determination”. Even if a regional referendum goes ahead approving an independent nation, they will say they give up that right for other concessions within the rest of the island. They know there is no economic or strategic worth in the north and east and Tamils are really after the Wet Zone where all economic activity is concentrated. No Tamil, if they have the means, wants to live in the arid north.

    Tamil Eelam (if or) when created will include Colombo as well. Tamils want no Eelam without Colombo.

    The unitary clause is meaningless even today so they will keep it in a federal constitution.

  3. S.Gonsal Says:

    Leaders with a vision will make the Sinhala Buddhist heritage and the culture of the country is given the deserved dominating status even if the majority of people speak a different language in the future. Certain clauses shall be made not negotiable and not amendable forever. Unfortunately we do not have a single selfless leader with a vision.

  4. Ananda-USA Says:

    The authority clearly identifies the danger posed by Tamil dominated Provincial Council of the North in that it supports a unilateral declaration of independence a la Kosovo.

    In the context of interference by foreign powers in making that happen, that is why I have been calling for REPEALING the 13th Amendment, DISSOLVING the Provincial Council System, and REPLACING it with a DISTRICT system of direct governance by the national government through DISTRICT GOVERNORS APPOINTED by the government and NOT ELECTED directly by the people living in each district.

    Citizens franchise exerciseductive through election of their representatives to the national parliament, and the various town and city councils, subject to control of the national government, is SUFFICIENT FRANCHISE for our minute country.

    Any other form of Local Administration that can be controlled by separatist minorities is a prescription for ultimate disintegration of the nation.

    As the author quite rightly points out, it is not a coincidence that Wigneswaran, fully trained and aware of such legal precedents leading to secession around the world, choose this as the opportune time to call for the Tamils to Rise Up!

    While we Sinhalese bicker among ourselves and stab each other in the bsck, the Tamil Separatists are systematically setting up the foundation for a successful unilateral declaration of independence!

    ALL of the other demands they are making, including the call for a FEDERAL system, are just RED HERRINGS to divert attention away from their REAL STRATEGY to achieve complete independence that thelate unlamented SUNGOD failed to achieve by military means.

    Let us SLEEP NO LONGER in a stupid stupor, let us ROOT OUT this growing CONSPIRACY between local and foreign conspirators to breakup our Motherland.

    The FIRST STEP MUST BE to SETUP a PATRIOTIC NATIONAL GOVERNMENT that serves the interests of the majority Sinhala Buddhist community of Sri Lanka instead of its disloyal minorities.

    In the FINAL ANALYSIS, it is ONLY the Sinhala Buddhist community that has an EXISTENTIAL STAKE in the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Sri Lanka as ONE NATION INDIVISIBLE!

  5. S.Gonsal Says:


    “The FIRST STEP MUST BE to SETUP a PATRIOTIC NATIONAL GOVERNMENT that serves the interests of the majority Sinhala Buddhist community of Sri Lanka instead of its disloyal minorities.”

    Yes, very correct. But how ? If you read my posting elsewhere with MR’s interview , clearly he is leading us in the same old way and just the opposite ot what you laid down correctly. This means, he, like a big giant, in closing our way, completely.

  6. plumblossom Says:

    The Sri Lankan Tamils demanding a ‘Tamil homeland’ is a bogus demand as per the history and archaeology of the country. Even a few months back, a discovery was made of an archaeological site in Anuradhapura dating back to 800BC and included beads, pottery etc. Anuradhapura was a large village by 900BC and there was an expansion into a city by 600BC. There is plenty of evidence of pre-historic cave discoveries such a the Fa Hien caves, the Bellanbendi pellessa and other cave discoveries especially in the wet zone of pre-historic sites or iron age and stone age discoveries (due to the clay in the wet zone preserving such sites well). The oldest skeleton found on the island is 37,000 years old. We know there were four tribes Yaksha, Naga, Raksha and Deva and around 600BC there was an influx of people from India, possibly Bengal or Orissa. These people together with the four tribes Yaksha, Naga, Raksha and Deva together then formed the Sinhala nation. This is why Anuradhapura which was a village by 900BC expanded into a city by 600BC.

    Does all this archaeological evidence not prove that the Sinhala people are the descendants of the indigenous people of the island i.e. the yakshas, Nagas, Rakshas and Devas? Much later by around the 16th century due to the Aryachakravarthi invasion of the Jaffna Peninsula the Sri Lanka Tamils migrated but into the Jaffna peninsula only. Later during the Portuguese, Dutch and British colonial times, there were further migrations of Sri Lankan Tamils (called Malabars meaning those from the Malabar coast of India) for purposes of planting tobacco and indigo brought in by the colonialists.

    Of course other people such as the Arab traders, Malays, then the Burgers (descendants of colonisers) also migrated to the island too.

    Does this not then prove that this island inclusive of the North and the East is the homeland of all its people? So is this demand for a separate state by the Sri Lankan Tamils (called Malabars meaning those from the Malabar coast of India), descendants of recent migrations to the island, not absurd and unacceptable?

    Let us state in the constitution that this island is the homeland of all its people, for the sake of justice and fairplay, by everyone concerned.

  7. plumblossom Says:

    There are further historical facts and figures which prove that this ‘Tamil homeland’ demand is completely bogus. Apart from many Buddhist ruins, a very important part of the Sinhala Buddhist civilization which is the extensive hydraulic system that still prevails in the dry zone of Sri Lanka. The Sinhala kings built over 10,000 (please check this figure in research papers for accuracy) large, medium and small scale irrigation reservoirs in Rajarata and Ruhuna encompassing today’s, North Central, North, Eastern, North Western provinces. For example Yodha Wewa Reservoir in today’s Mannar in the North was built by the Sinhala King Dathusena. The Pavatkulam Reservoir in Vavuniya in the North was built by the Sinhala King Mahasen. The Kanthale Reservoir in the East was built by Sinhala King Agbo II. All of the irrigation reservoirs present in the North Central, North, North Western and East were built by Sinhala Kings.

    In fact, to get the water to flow out of the reservoirs in a smooth manner, the Sinhala Engineers invented the biso kotuwa or the besi kotuwa (as in wathura besi kotuwa), a type of valve pit, or a type of water outlet out falling from the reservoir where water pressure can be managed so as not to damage the tank bund. Another use of the Sinhala irrigation engineer was the anicut where a river’s water was diverted using a dam type structure built across the river partially blocking the river flow and diverting the water into open channel flow canals.

    The amazing and extensive irrigation system in Sri Lanka’s dry zone encompassing today’s North Central, North, East and North Western Provinces encompassing over 10,000 (please check this figure for accuracy) large, medium and small scale reservoirs, open channel flow canals etc. was built by the Sinhala Kings.

    Therefore there is no doubt whatsoever that there was a Sinhala Buddhist civilization encompassing today’s North Central, North, East and North Western Provinces, even just by considering this extensive irrigation reservoir system. R.L. Brohier , H.C.P. Bell, D.LO. Mendis, Henry Parker and many archaeologists, irrigation engineers and surveyors have written many books and research papers on this subject. In fact even the British Governor at the time Sir Henry Ward marvelled at the ingenious Sinhala irrigation engineer and wrote on the subject and Even Sir Emerson Tennent, another British Governor marvelled at the ingenious Sinhala irrigation engineer and wrote on the subject. In fact, the Sinhala irrigation engineer was a master of hydraulics. Not only that, extensive data on rainfall patterns would have had to be collected to figure out the capacity of the irrigation reservoirs. Very accurate surveying of the lay of the land would have had to be carried out to come up with very accurate contour maps in order to figure out the placing of the reservoirs and the traces of the open channel flow canals.

  8. plumblossom Says:

    There is no Tamil Homeland! It is a completely bogus invention. The writer has got the history slightly wrong. Even the most recent Pandyan invasion just prior to the arrival of the Portuguese in the 16th century by Aryachakravarthi only invaded the Jaffna peninsula only and the settlement of the Jaffna peninsula was very sparse. All earlier invasions by the Cholas etc. they invaded Anuradhapura and Pollonnaruwa and these was for short periods of time and there were no settlements whatsoever at all as a result. Most Tamils were brought over by the Portugese and the Dutch to work on Tobacco and Indigo plantations set up by the Portugese and the Dutch after the 16th century.

    There were from around 600BC over 43 attempted invasions of the island by the Chola, Kalinga, Pandya, Vijayanagar and other South and Indian Kingdoms etc. However only six succeeded. There was one invasion by a Malayan kingdom too. These were during Sinhala Kings Walagamba, Dhutugemunu, Dhathusena, Vijayabahu I, Parakramabahu II, Buvanekabahu V and Parakramabahu VI times. However invaders invaded Anuradhapura, Pollonnaruwa and stayed only for a short period of time and left the island once they were overwhelmed. There were no settlements due to these invasions except the very last invasion by Aryachakravarthi of the Jaffna Peninsula.

    When looking at Sri Lanka’s history, it is extremely obvious that from 600BC to around 1400AD there were three kingdoms, all Sinhala Buddhist, Ruhuna, Pihiti or Rajarata and Maya or Malayarata. Rajarata encompassed today’s North Central, North Western, Northern and even the Central Province. Ruhunu rata encompassed today’s Uva, Eastern and Southern Provinces. The Kandyan Kingdom from 1400AD encompassed most of the island inclusive of today’s Northern and the Eastern Provinces except for the Jaffna Peninsula. Even the Jaffna Peninsula was invaded and occupied by force by Aryachakravarthi (Pandyan) and actually did belong to Rajarata earlier and later the Kandyan Kingdom.

    Today’s provincial boundaries were drawn up by the British colonialists as per their divide and rule policy and the Sinhala people were not consulted when drawing up these provincial boundaries. In the meantime, most Sri Lankan Tamils of today were actually brought over during Dutch and British times to the Jaffna Peninsula and elsewhere to work on tobacco and indigo plantations which were planted extensively in all the colonies since they were much sought after and made a lot of money for the colonialists. Therefore they are recent arrivals and cannot claim homelands or separate states whatsoever.

    The usual practice when a colonial power hands over their former colonies is to hand it over to its original owners. Therefore the British colonialists should hand over the Kandyan Kingdom to the Kandyan Sinhalese from whom they took it by force. Since the Kandyan Kingdom encompassed the North and the East, these provinces too should be handed over to the Kandyan Sinhalese who are its rightful owners. Even the Jaffna Peninsula should be handed over to the Kandyan Sinhalese since it was part of Rajarata and was forcefully occupied by Aryachakravarthi (Pandyan).

    Since this has now been done already, the TNA, other separatists or the US, UK EU, Canada, Norway, Sweden and India cannot demand that present day Northern or even the Eastern provinces be provided any more powers or be made into federal states since this is totally going against the history and archaeology of the island and totally going against the rights of the Sinhala people who also have fundamental rights to claim the entire island inclusive of the North and the East as their homeland first and foremost.

    History which was dropped as a subject should be taught at school since Sri Lanka has a very long history and it is very beneficial for the next generation to learn the history and archaeology of the island based on actual archaeological findings, archaeological ruins, artefacts, stone inscriptions, ola leaf writings and so on. Otherwise people will believe any bogus history invented by interested parties to their benefit, not based on facts but invented for their own nefarious purposes. Today these settlers such as the Sri Lankan Tamils are inventing history for their own purposes without any archaeological evidence whatsoever to back up such bogus claims. Therefore it is imperative that history is taught as a subject in school as soon as possible.

  9. plumblossom Says:

    Mr. Dharshan Weerasekara, since you are a lawyer, if you know Ranil. Sirisena, CBK, Mnagala or indeed the godfather of the yet to be revealed federal or Eelam constitution, Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, please try to convince these traitors and the other treacherous elements of this yahapalanaya government not to betray the sovereignty of Sri Lanka and that Sri Lanka does not need a new constitution at all right now.

    Pleas keep up the good work and please convince as many fellow lawyers as possible of the extreme dangers of the yet to be unveiled federal or Eelam constitution. Please ask them to speak up and shout out loud before it is too late.

  10. SA Kumar Says:

    There is no Tamil Homeland! It is a completely bogus invention.- plumblossom ageed machang
    but We-Tamila 70M are only 16 maritan miles away from mother Lanka but in your argument we arrived yester years ?

    Now you know Your Demil-sakkiliya call you Sinhala Modaya ( Moddu Seena) since Elra( Duddukamu) Time that is BC 106.

  11. Fran Diaz Says:

    Dharshan has pointed out a home truth : the Inconsistencies in the Sri Lanka Constitution.

    Not only are there Inconsistencies, the Sri Lanka Constitution is twisted into Disunity by Law imposed from outside by the 13-A, imposed by INDIA on the JRJ govt in 1987.
    This Amendment is still in place.

    Also, the 6th Amendment is yet to be acted on.

    No wonder there is Separatism in Lanka, sponsored by foreign countries too, and their Agents in Lanka.

    Unless ALL Leaders get together and save the Unitary Status of the country, be prepared to be re-Colonised, as well as split up, and rife with foreign law, as made possible by TPP.

    INDIA had better watch it ! They will be next in line for dismembering.

  12. Ananda-USA Says:

    Mr. SA Kumar,

    OK, OK … you call us Sinhalayas Modayas., hope you are having fun while you can.

    BUT, But, but …. remember that all those Highly Intelligent HIGH IQ Tamils who followed an illiterate SunGod in Unceasing Waves, are now pushing up daisies through the mud along the banks of the Nanthikandal Lagoon?

    Isn’t rather a SHAME that they allowed themselves to be OUTWITTED & WIPED OUT by the Sinhala Modayas?

    They say that those who point ONE finger at others and call them Modayas, really have FOUR fingers pointing right back at themselves!!

    Ever thought of that … My dear Damila Sakodaraya??

    These Highly Intelligent Tamil Eelamists are screwing themselves AGAIN, RIGHT NOW, by forcing relatively moderate people like me who want to let and let live with our Tamil Sakodarayas to become HARDLINE OPPONENTS of the Tamil community as a whole unwilling to GIVE ANYTHING to them.

    The more the TAMIL SEPARATISTS demand an EELAM, and NO OTHER TAMILS reject those demands and opt for peaceful co-existence, the MORE we say HELL NO!

    We are moving fast towards even wanting Sri Lanka to be REDEFINED as a non-secular Sinhala Buddhist Nation in the CONSITUTION, in which other minorities have equal protection under the law, but that is all.

    Ever thought of that, that all this wailing for the return of the SunGod in the guise of Wigneswaran, is turning us Sinhalaese into HARDERLINE patriots … My Dear SA Kumar Sakodaraya??

    So, please ask yourself … MY Dear SA Kumar Sakodaraya …… are these Tamil EELAMISTS doing their community ANY GOOD …. in the LONG TERM, or are they going to CRASH & BURN the Tamil Community AGAIN …. just like the SunGod and his diehard followers did?

    That is what I have been warning about, but driven by GREED, NO TAMIL LISTENS, just like the greedy monkey with its hand clenched around the cookies in the hunter’s trap, unwilling to let go and run, even as it hears the hunter coming!

    What a SHAME … another opportunity LOST for peaceful co-existence TOGETHER in ONE nation as EQUALS!

  13. SA Kumar Says:


    We both are in same side but is that karma or some thing else We are divided !!!

    You & Me I tell you true, NO Tamil want TE , even Saiva TE ( Siva Sena laned in Vavuniya now) Not at all.

    Why I call you Sinhala Modaya & Tamil Sakkilia becuse my anger of ourself .

    Highly Intelligent HIGH IQ Tamils who followed an illiterate SunGod- NO We did not have any alternative (black mailed) by our Self declared VVT(Valveddi Thurai) Karayan caste (fishing) Thesiya Thalaivar (National leader) VP & co from 1987 to 2009.
    FYI, Our liberation fight was over when IPKF landed that what our elected A Amirthalingam wanted also he want to fully implement before IPKF to leave . that all We-All Tamil people wanted We want United Sinhala Island (Chignkala Theevu).

    as usal Our Sinhala Leader (RP) gave arms to our Mad man than we both know rest is histrory.

    So, please ask yourself … MY Dear SA Kumar Sakodaraya …… are these Tamil EELAMISTS doing their community ANY GOOD …. in the LONG TERM- not at all .

    Fully implement 13A & 6A together , settle 100,000 Bhuddist Sinhala Family ( SF said for long term security ) & bring kalu kagnkai or Maha velly river to Irana madu kulam We all live United mother Lanka for ever & We never ever face Eelam war V & no more 1956 to 1983 Demila baila !!!

  14. SA Kumar Says:

    *settle in Vanni

  15. SA Kumar Says:


    make my ward , soon my comments approved your mate will give his comments here !!!

  16. SA Kumar Says:

    no comments my Chignkala Sakotharam Ananda-USA ?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2024 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress