Harindra Dunuwille
Much has been said and written
about the Kandyan Convention of 1815 whereby the Kandyan Kingdom was ceded to
the British. Historians and writers have over the years interpreted the events
that led to the signing and the cessation of what was the last bastion of
Sinhale”. The document itself, its drafting, its local signatories and their very
signatures, whether it was actually signed on the 2nd of March 1815
or on subsequent days, whether there were some who did not sign the convention
are questions yet being debated. It has been
called a betrayal of what was left of the island. To me this is the biggest
myth in regard to the Kandyan Convention.
After 200 years since that historic event, this
article is an attempt to put in perspective the circumstances and the factors
that resulted in the signing of that treaty between the Lieutenant-General
Robert Brownrigg, Governor and Commander in Chief in and over the British
settlements and Territories in the Island of Ceylon, acting in the name and on
behalf of His Majesty George the Third, King and his Royal Highness George,
Prince of Wales, Regent of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on
the one part and the Adigars, Dissawas and other Principal Chiefs of the
Kandyan Provinces on behalf of the inhabitants, in the presence of the Mohottales,
Korales, Vidanes and other sub ordinate Headmen from several Provinces and of
the people then and there assembled of the other part”. It seeks also to refer briefly
to the impact and ramifications of that agreement.
The Kandyan kingdom was established in 1580 at a
time when the maritime areas of the island had been captured and were held by Western
colonial rulers. The Portugese came in 1505 and were followed by the Dutch in
1648, and then by the English who took control of the costal maritime areas of Ceylon
(Sri Lanka) by 1796.
In 1802 the Treaty of Amiens formally ceded the
Dutch occupied part of the island to the British, and thus the British colony
of Ceylon was established. By the turn of the 19th century, of the 4
kingdoms in Ceylon, the kingdoms of Sitawaka, Kotte and Jaffna had fallen into
foreign hands leaving only the Kandyan Kingdom as the only independent
Sinhalese kingdom. This holding out, in the heat of continuous pressure, both
military and economic was by fortitude and tact.
British expansionism and colonising began in
the 16th century. By 1769, it had colonized America, Canada, and New
Zealand and also included colonies in Africa and the West Indies. With these
conquests, it had established the vast Empire, where it was said that the sun
never set”. Replacing the Dutch with its East India Company,Britainfirmly
established trading posts in India, with the periodic annexation of parts of
India, namely, Madras in 1639, Bombay in 1661 and Calcutta in 1690. In 1770 the
British orchestrated a famine that killed one third of the Indian population.
Despite the successful repulsion of invading
troops for over 150 years by the Kandyans, the reality of the circumstances of
the early 1800s was that the British had already annexed and conquered India
and had established its writ there as it had in many parts of the world. British troop reinforcements were available
at hand across the Palk straits should a sustained military campaign was needed
to capture the Kandyan kingdom. From all accounts such an exercise was on the
cards at the time.
The saga of Kandy is a remarkable one. It is a record of
how a small landlocked kingdom, with about half a million impoverished souls,
politically disunited, not particularly warlike, economically strangled,
continued a prolonged struggle for survival against three European foes at the
height of their prowess. The Kandyan military resistance is a chapter worth
recording” – (Lorna Dewaraja- The Kandyan Kingdom of Sri Lanka)
It is a matter of record that the war tactics
used included, what is now called guerilla warfare”, a strategy of hit and
run, deliberate disengagement and withdrawal, employing
a scorched earth” military strategy whilst inveigling the
enemy in to unfamiliar and rough territory and lunching multi-pronged attacks, often
from higher ground. The terrain, the adverse and unfamiliar weather conditions
bringing with it leeches, mosquitos added to the misery of the invaders who often
fell sick, ran out of food and ammunition.
There was a time when the retreating armies were chased far beyond the borders
of the kingdom even up to Sitawaka in the in the West.
However,
during these times of conflict, there was contact with the foreigners for purposes
of trade and security. King Senerat entered in to a treaty with the Dutch in
1612 followed by what is called the first Kandyan Treaty of 1638 signed by King
Rajasinha II with the Commander of the Dutch East India Company at Batticaloa
to secure the defense of the kingdom from the Portugese. A fresh agreement was
signed by the King with the Dutch in 1649. In 1766 another treaty was signed by
King Keerthi Sri Rajasinha and the Dutch Governor of Colombo again at
Batticaloa on 14th February 1766. By this agreement the ‘king conceded the
Dutch possessions of Colombo, Matara, Galle, Kalpitiya, Trincomalee, Mannar and
Batticaloa with a cost line of 4 miles inland. At this time the Dutch were an
economic power with their cinnamon industry and trade.
The reign of the last King of Kandy, Sri Wickrema Rajasinha,
the last of the four Indian Nayakkar kings, was a matter of consternation not
only to his Ministers and Chiefs but to the Buddhist clergy led by the two
Official custodians of the sacred Tooth relict of the Lord Buddha enshrined and
housed at the Temple of the Tooth, namely, the High Priests of the Asgiriya and
Malwatta monasteries (temples). The Nayakkar kings were never fully accepted.
There was a general aversion to their foreign ancestry. Furthermore, there were
doubts cast on the royal ancestry of the Nayakkar kings and their regal legitimacy.
The combination of a doubtful royal ancestry and the foreignness of the Nayakkars
justified the opposition of the nobles against their alien king (Lorna Dewaraja- The Kandyan Kingdom).
Of the three preceding Nayakkar
kings, who took advice from their Prime ministers in governing the country, Sri
Wickrema Rajasinha, on the other hand, partly because of his autocratic nature
and partly because of the strong influence of his Nayakkar relatives, was not
inclined to follow his predecessors. When Pilimatalawe complained to him that
he did not take his advice, the king rebuffed him by replying I am not to be
directed by the Chiefs, but the Chiefs were are to take orders from me’ When
Pilimatalawe objected to numerous public
works undertaken by the king as to imposed great hardship on the people, the
King removed him from his position’ He continued his policy of undermining the
power of the Chiefs by splitting the Dissawas (Provinces), shuffling the
officers, appointing persons to high offices from outside the established
ruling families, raising the fees payable by the Chiefs, revival of death duty
on their properties. He punished Chiefs ruthlessly on the slightest pretext and
often without trial; thus he executed many of them such as Arawwawala,
Dangamuwa, Lewke, Puswella, Ratwatte, Kandepola and Mampitiya Bandara. Local
Chiefs who protested at the forced labour in the construction of the Kandy Lake
were impaled on the lake bed itself. Almost every ruling family had lost one or
more of their members during this programme, some went into hiding or left the
city. There were at least three unsuccessful attempts to assassinate him”. The
King also antoganised the Buddhist Clergy not only by his halfhearted support
of Buddhism but also by his attempts to shift the Malwatta Temple to enlarge
the lake and to shift the Natha devale to build a new Palace for himself on its
site. He imprisoned several monks and executed two Anunayakes, namely Ven.
Sooriyagoda and Ven. Paranathala–( The Last days of the Kandyan Kingdom – Dr.
J.B.Kelegama (1993))
Costal islanders, having survived the jack boot authority of
the Portugese and the Dutch weary of another invading foreign force, the
British, choose to leave their native places of abode and seek the sanctuary of
the last Sinhala outpost in the hills known as the Sinhale’. These outsiders’
did not, at first, assimilate with the Kandyan inhabitants, and this marked the
Up-country and Low-country Sinhalese divide. Of these some had stealthily woven
their way in to the confidence of King Sri Wickrema Rajasinha. They introduced
British Officers to the King, encouraging the establishment of trading
arrangements. This was also the time when Muslim traders made their way into
the Kandyan provinces. A gradual
cultural and social shift was creeping into the hitherto pristine Sinhala
Buddhist way in the Kingdom that the nobles and the peasants had jealously
nurtured and preserved.
Notwithstanding the conversion to Buddhism by these Nayakkar
kings and building of temples by them, it has also been argued that with a
growing ethnic consciousness of the Sinhala people in that part of the country,
it triggered the rise of a Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism at the time.
Hardy mountaineers of the interior, preserved their
independence enabling us to form an estimate of Sinhalese as a live and
individual people, with a national character and a national art, an
individuality and art which is more difficult and often impossible to trace in
the low country districts, long subject to western influence.”
The people of the interior became the saviors of culture and
history, the preservation of names, dresses and legal systems that derived much
from their ancient heritage. Thus, it shall be to the eternal credit of the
Kandyans that the Buddhist religion, the customs and culture including the arts,
dances and rituals, unpolluted by foreign influence, subsists to this day, much
of which is aped in the all parts of the country.
It was a time when those living in the maritime areas had
succumbed to the invaders and capitulated, jettisoning whatever religion,
culture and indigenous culture that they might have had. These people succeeded
in repulsing all foreign invasions for over three hundred years and preserved
their ancient line of monarchy and their unique culture for the posterity” – (Ananda
Coomaraswamy (1912)
Historians have argued and differed on the tyrannical and oppressive
character of the last King. Conversely he has been portrayed as a sympathetic
and humane man by his captors. The brutal execution of the wife and small
children of the renegade Ehelepola Adikaram who had defected to the British is
described, as follows: After having first incarcerated the wife aged 34 years and
3 minor children, including an infant, on 1st May 1814 at a spot
between the Natha devale (temple) and the Vishnu devale, a drunken king ordered
and watched the execution of the entire family.
A distraught Kandyan populace, it is said did not cook any meals in
their houses for a whole week. The wooden mortar used to crush the infant is
said to have been in the possession of Dr. J.W.Attygalle as at 1929. (Lesser Known Stories of the Kandyan Kingdom –Chamikara
Pilapitiya, 2018.)
The wanton
destruction of human life comprises or implies the existence of general
oppression. In conjunction with that, no other proofs of the exercise of
tyranny require to be specified; and one single instance, of no distant date,
will be acknowledged to include every tiling which is barbarous and
unprincipled in public rule, and to portray the last stage of individual
depravity and wickedness, the obliteration of every trace of conscience, and
the complete extinction of human feeling. Coupled with their growing resentment
to the dilution of their cherished, indigenous religious and social norms and
values and the danger thereto, the Kandyan chiefs looked to secure those norms
and values. Undoubtedly two other strong motivating factors were the removal of
an unreliable King and the diminishing of the influence that they hitherto
enjoyed. Attempts to install a Sinhala king, in the form of the Pretender,
Muttusamy had already ended in failure.
The
Culavamsa (Part II) describes the King`s tyranny as follows: He had the chief
councillors, the great dignitaries and many other officials gathered together
and destroyed his subject like the devil. He had the people, many hundreds in
number brought to different spots and had them impaled, merciless in death.
Much wealth that had come to the people by inheritance, the king confiscated
like a thief that robs villages”
Dr.
Colvin R de Silva`s assessment of Pilimatalawe is as follows: If the Adigar`s
methods were disloyal, his motives did not lack a semblance of patriotism.
That, he a Sinhalese of royal descent, should long to depose a foreign dynasty
is as understandable as his intention to implement that consummation to forward
his personal ambitions was natural. At the same time there can be little doubt
that, though he offered to become in some fashion a British tributary, he had
no real intention to surrender Kandy. His policy was simply in line with a
fateful Kandyan tradition – calling in a foreigner to settle domestic disputes
but discarding him on attaining that object” – (Ceylon under the British
Occupation – Vol I).
The
chiefs had invited the British to depose of their despotic King, not to take
over their kingdom. The unequivocal assurances of D`Oyly that the British had
no plans of conquest and aggrandizement.
Marshall describes the feeling of the Kandyan chiefs thus: You have now
deposed of the King and nothing more is required. You may leave us” They had
been lulled into a false sense of security by D`Oyly and naively believed the
British expressions of good intentions and sympathy with their plight allowing
themselves to be duped. It was Ehelepola
who persuaded the Chiefs to support the British. It can be surmised that it was
a reason for his brother-in-law, Keppetipola Dissawa to the patriotic freedom
uprising three years later.
A precursor to the signing of the Kandyan Convention was the
Official declaration of the Settlement of the Kandyan Provinces, the
Proclamation of 10th January 1815 which stated that it is not
against the Kandyan Nation that the arms of His Majesty are directed. His
Excellency proclaims hostility against that tyrannical power alone, which has
provoked aggravated outrages and indignities which has cut off the most ancient
and noblest families deluged the land with blood and by the violation of every
religious and moral law became an object of abhorrence to mankind.”
The role of the
Chief Priests of the 2 Buddhist Temples, as the chief custodians of the sacred
tooth relic of Lord Buddha, – recognised as the symbol of Buddhism, was
significant as was the role of the Kandyan chiefs. The sacred relic had been
taken from place to place during turbulent times of invasions and war, for it is
the belief to this day that whoever rules should do so where the sacred relic
is enshrined. Of the two, the Mahanayake – the Chief of the Malwatta Temple, Ven.
Kobbekaduwa Thero who was an educated and knowledgeable person, made his own
assessment of the British vis a vis the Dutch and the Portugese. In his view,
the British were more qualified not only to administer the country but he perceived
them as a more educated and a more reasonable and reliable people. The
negotiations of the treaty were led by the MilleweDissawa, acting as
spokesperson of the nobles where their concerns and questions were raised.
The role of John D`Oyly
is very significant. This was a British Civil officer, who had been described an
intelligence man, a mole, a master-spy, a manipulator, a shrewd and wily negotiator
among other descriptions. Having learnt Sinhala, he befriended both the clergy
and the King and his Ministers and Chiefs. Much of the drafting of the
Convention is attributed to him.
In the initial discussions had with D’Oyly, thenobles
andthe religious potentates of Kandy were adamant in including clause 5
concerning the protection of Buddhism. Later at the meeting with the governor,
the heads of the two Buddhist monasteries of Asgiriya and Malwatta extracted a
guarantee that Buddhism would not be compromised” – (The Kandyan Convention at
the Audience Hall – Rootsweb.com)
The British Governor Brownrigg promised, in the name
of His Majesty the King of Great Britain, to the Kandyan chiefs, the
continuance of their respective ranks and dignities; to the people, relief from
all arbitrary severities and oppressions, with the fullest protection of their
persons and property; and to all classes, the inviolate maintenance of their
religion and the preservation of their ancient laws and institutions, with the
extension of the blessings resulting from the establishment of justice,
security and peace, which are enjoyed by the most favoured nations living under
the safeguard of the British crown.
After the capture of the last King of Kandy by the British
in 1815, the indigenous ruling nobility of the Kandyan Kingdom entered into a
solemn Convention with the British Colonial Government of that time with the
fervent hope and expectation that, its conditions would be respected and
honoured by the rulers of the British Empire.
The objective of this bi lateral international agreement, unprecedented
as it was, was entered into whereby the people of the subject nation were guaranteed rights, privileges and safe
guards, specifically preserving the
cultural and religious heritage if its people, a document which was to receive
the endorsement of the British Parliament.
The
questions that begs consideration is whether the Religious Leaders and the
Chiefs negotiated from a position of strength or weakness? Why did the British
negotiate if they were in an unassailable position, and why enter in to a
treaty with guarantees to the conquered”? In such a situation, can the signing
of this negotiated convention be said to be a betrayal?
The Kandyan Convention was a Treaty
officially recognised as having been signed on the 2nd of March 1815,
but it is said that some signatures were subsequently placed after further
discussion among the Kandyan Chiefs. It marked the end of 2358 years of
self-rule on the island.
On
this day the 2nd of March 1815, it is recorded by Captain L.D.Bush,
an English General, that governor Brownrigg arrived early at the Audience Hall.
He had beengreetedby Molligoda Adigar and others and a discussion ensured. Thereafter,
the Governor had called on the Chief High priest Ven. Kobbekaduwa at the
Malwatta Temple. After lengthy discussion, attended by other senior priests and
the Kandyan nobles, agreement had been reached, especially with regards to that
part of the Convention which relates to Buddhism, its temples and places of
worship. It is reported that the High
Priest addressed the Governor thus: We have heard of your virtues, of your
piety and of your charity; and the great revolutions which have been affected
among us, have had their source, not less in the admiration of your character
and government, than the evils we have suffered”. This original transcript is
said to be in the Library of the Malwatta temple. Thereafter the Governor left
for the Audience Hall once again. He had been followed by the Kandyan chiefs
and joined by the Mahanayake and his retinue. The signing of the Kandyan
Convention is said to have taken place late on the night of the 2nd
March 1815. (Chamikara Pilapitiya – Lesser Known Stories of the Kandyan kingdom
– Vol II (2018)
The Sinhala translation of the Convention
clearly says it was an agreement between the Kingdom of Britain and Sinhale,
which meant the whole Island and its maritime territories and the ocean around.
This historic Convention had only 12 clauses and it was issued in Kandy as a
Royal Proclamation of the 2nd of March 1815.
As mentioned previously,
Governor Robert
Brownrigg,
signed for the British Crown with John D’Oyly, designated as the chief Translator and another high ranking Official, James Sutherlandaswitnesses.
The Kandyan Chiefs who signed the convention were:-
Ehelepola Nilame
Molligoda Snr. – Maha
Adigar & Dissawa
of the Sath Korales
PilimaTalawuwe Snr. alias Kapuwatte – 2nd
Adigar & Dissawa of
Sabaragamuwa
PilimaTalawuwe Jnr. – Dissawa of Hathra
Korales
Monarawila – Dissawa of Uva
Ratwatte – Dissawa of Matale
Molligoda Jnr. – Dissawa of Thun
Korales
Dullewe – Dissawa of Walapane
Millewe – Dissawa
of Wellassa & Bintenna
Galagama – Dissawa of
Tamankaduwa
Galagoda – Dissawa
of Nuwara Kalawiya
The
clauses in the agreement were, briefly;
- ‘Sri Wickrema Rajasinha’,
the ‘Malabari‘ king, to forfeit
all claims to the throne of Kandy.
- The king is declared fallen
and deposed and the hereditary claim of his dynasty, abolished and
extinguished.
- All his male relatives are
banished from the island.
- The dominion is vested in
the sovereign of the British Empire, to be exercised through colonial
governors, except in the case of the Adikarams, Dissawas, Mohottalas, Korales,
Vidanes and other subordinate officers reserving the rights, privileges and
powers within their respective ranks.
- The religion of Buddhism is
declared inviolable and its rights to be maintained and protected.
- All forms of physical
torture and mutilations are abolished.
- The governor alone can
sentence a person to death and all capital punishments to take place in the
presence of accredited agents of the government.
- All civil and criminal
justice over Kandyan to be administered according to the established norms and
customs of the country, the government reserving to itself the rights of
interposition when and where necessary.
- Other non-Kandyan positions
to remain according to British law.
- The proclamation annexing
the Three and Four Korales and Sabaragamuwa is repealed.
- The dues and revenues to be
collected for the King of England as well as for the maintenance of internal
establishments in the island.
- The Governor alone can
facilitate trade and commerce.
Of thesethe following clauses are of significance:
4th
Clause
The dominion of the Kandyan
provinces is vested in the Sovereign of the British empire and to be exercised
through the Governors or Lieutenant Governors of Ceylon for the time being, and
their accredited Agents, saving to the
Adigars, Dissawas, Mohottalas, Korales,
Vidanes and all other chief and subordinate native Headmen lawfully
appointed by authority of the British government, the rights, privileges and
powers of their respective offices and to all classes of people the safety of
their persons and property, with their civil rights and immunities, according
to the laws, institutions and customs established and in force amongst them.
5thClause
The
religion of Boodho (Buddha), professed by the Chiefs and inhabitants of these
provinces, is declared inviolable, and its rites, ministers, and places of
worship are to be maintained and protected.
8th Clause.
Subject to these conditions, the administration of civil and criminal justice and police over the
Kandian inhabitants of the said provinces is to be exercised according to
established forms, and by the ordinary authorities; saving always the
inherent right of government to redress grievances and reform abuses in all in
stances whatever, particular or general,and where such interposition shall
become necessary.
At the
time and to my knowledge even to date, never has a mighty, powerful invading
foreign country entered in to an agreement with the subjugated State with guarantees
and safe guards including provisions for the continued use of religious and
administrative practices and saving unto the Chiefs and other state
functionaries the powers of office with guarantees of the safety of person and
property with civil rights and immunities. Surely, this cannot by any stretch
of imagination be termed a betrayal.
Subsequently, there was a period of relative peace and
tranquility during the first three years of British rule (1815-1818). However,
the indigenous leaders increasingly witnessed an erosion and violation of the legally binding terms and conditions
laid down in the Kandyan Convention, by the lawfully appointed authority of the British government. The rights,
privileges and powers of their respective offices were usurped creating dissension.
A dispatch by Lord Bathurst from
London on 30th August 1815 to Governor Brownrigg stated: His Royal
Highness has commanded to signify to you his general approbation of the
principles of liberal policy by which you have been guided in acceding to the
convention for the annexation of the Kingdom of Kandy. I cannot conceal from
you that the satisfaction of His Royal
Highness would have been more complete if the 5th Article of the
Convention, which relates to the superstition of Boodho, had been couched in
terms less liable to misconstruction……………….. The term inviolable’ in the
Article 5, as I do not conceive it can have been, understood as precluding
their efforts which are making to disseminate Christianity in Ceylon, by the
propagation of the scriptures, or by the fair and discreet preaching of its ministers,
it would be very much in variance with the principles upon which his Majesty`s
Government have uniformly acted for guarding against so great an evil”.
There appeared re-appropriation and a resistance to the British
rule. A very intrinsic part of the Kandyan politics and power was the critical
relationship between the Buddhist clergy and the nobles of the time. A
definitive usurpation of this was becoming evident. Colonial dispatches to
London refer to many episodes of that time in religious ceremonies. Kandyan
customs, legal practices and traditions were re-appropriated as a means of
resistance. The Kandyan Sinhalese were described in these dispatches asa
rebellious people with a subversive national culture’
A British Parliamentary
report in 1849 stated that there are periodical manifestations of one abiding
and continuous feeling in the minds of the Kandyan people to restore a Kandyan sovereign
and an impatience with British supremacy which turned to outrage at the
unilateral abrogation of the Convention and in blatant violation of its
undertakings, paving the way for the historic uprising, the first freedom
struggle for independence of 1818, which the British termed a rebellion – (The
Historical Journal – James Wilson – Cambridge University Press)
Governor Brownrigg unilaterally abrogated this
Convention by a Royal Proclamation in 1818. It declared the supremacy the
British Crown, exercised through the Governor and his Agents and to which
obedience of all citizens is due. The Board of Commissioners and the resident
Agents of the Government were vested with the sole power over the affairs of
the territory. This was issued on the wake of the so-called rebellion of 1818.
The last section (56) stated “He (Governor) also reserves full power to
alter the present provisions as may appear hereafter necessary and expedient:
and he requires, in his Majesty’s name, all officers civil and military, all
Adigars, Dissawas and other chiefs, and all other His Majesty’s subjects, to be
obedient, aiding, and assisting in the execution of these or other his orders,
as they shall answer the contrary at their peril”.
The reasons that led to the above state of affairs are
narrated by different historians. Some of the more perceptive British rulers of
the time detected the signs of the gathering storm well in advance. Without paying due heed to such prognoses, high
colonial authorities continued their blatant display of the ‘right of
conquest’.
Sir A.C. Lawrie, the District Judge of Kandy, writing a few years after the Rebellion
had this to say: The story of British rule in the Kandyan country during the
rebellion of 1818 cannot be related without shame….. By 1819, hardly a member
of the leading families remained alive…… those whom the sword and the gun had
spared, cholera and small pox and privations had slain by the hundreds….. any
subsequent effort by the Government to develop Kandyan areas were only attempts
begun and abandoned…. (Lawrie’s Gazetteer, 203p.).
In 1844 the British reneged on the commitment to safeguard
Buddhism. The ferocity with which a betrayed people rose and fought was such
that the armed struggle claimed many British lives until they were put down
with brutish force. Governor Torrington`s response was the imposition of
martial law and a brutish quelling of the uprising with troops brought from
India. The leaders, and members of the Kandyan hierarchy were executed,
including Buddhist Priests as stated in the debate in the House of Commons in
their full robes’. Torrington was
recalled and a motion of censure on the colonial government in Ceylon was narrowly
defeated by 282 to 202 in May 1851
The Proclamation has tightened the grip of the
British authority over the Island and set the process of gradual erosion of
power of the priests and the local aristocrats.
It took a hundred years and more for the country
to achieve independence in 1948 with a constitution drafted and enacted by the
British Parliament, referred to as the Soulbury constitution.
The 1972 Republican Constitution repealed the
1948 Soulbury Constitution and enshrined a provision for the protection and
fostering of Buddhism, which was copied in to current constitution in 1978.
The Kandyan Convention finds a place in the Legislative
Enactments of Ceylon and Brownrigg’s Proclamation ratified by the British Parliament
also appears in the Sri Lankan statutes under the title Declaration of British
Sovereignty, although it is in direct conflict and in contradiction with
Kandyan Convention.
The question whether the unilateral abrogation of the
Convention solemnly entered into by and between two states is valid remains an
unanswered legal question. Rules of natural justice would undoubtedly say
otherwise. Almost a hundred years later, the British Privy Council – the
highest Appellate Court in the Commonwealth – was called upon to make a
decision based upon the Kandyan Convention. It was the famous Gampola
Wallahagoda Devale case, arising from an objection taken in 1879 to the
conduct of an annual Perahera (Religious Procession)by the Buddhists. The
District Judge of Kandy, Paul E. Peiris (later Sir Paul) held that the
guarantees in the Convention allowed the Buddhists to conduct its religious
rites. The Supreme Court over turned
that judgment and an appeal was preferred to the Privy Council in London. At that time, the Governor Sir John Anderson
intervened and settled the dispute allowing the conduct of the procession along
the streets of Gampola. It can be safely assumed that the British Authorities
got the Governor to do what he did, and thereby saving face.
Even now, it is open to the British to repent its violation
of the treaty and the brutality that they unleashed and make reparation.The
Kandyan peasantry and their descendants wait reparation by the way of the
return of the land of their ancestors snatched
by the façade of the Waste Lands
Ordinance.
The Kandyan Convention as much as the subsequent struggles
ensured the preservation not only ofthe pristine Theravada doctrine of Buddhism,
but as importantly, the unpolluted indigenous Kandyan arts, culture and
traditions which prevail to this day and are proudly displayed in all parts of
the country by all Sri Lankans.
This
is an English version of the Sinhala speech delivered by Harindra Dunuwille, on
Saturday 9th March 2019 at the Arts Faculty Auditorium of the
University of Peradeniya at the Public seminar under the theme The Kandyan
Convention and the future of Sri Lanka” . Dunuwille is a Senior Attorney at
Law He
is a former State Minister and
Mayor of Kandy and is presently
Chairman of the Central Provincial Public Service Commission.
