We want reasonable devolution and a workable solution: Sampanthan
At 73, Rajavarothayam Sampanthan is one of the few remaining 'old generation' Tamil politicians liked by leaders of successive governments for being affable and hated at the same time for the causes that he champions.
He is leader of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the second largest opposition political party in Parliament. The party's talks with the government to formulate a political package to address Tamil grievance have broken down. It has come at a time when Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna declared that President Rajapaksa had given him a commitment to "implement in full" the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. Rajapaksa, however, has declared that issues like police powers would have to be discussed by the proposed Parliamentary Select Committee. Here are edited excerpts of an interview he gave the Sunday Times.
ON THE 13TH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION:
This subject has been in the vocabulary of successive governments for a long time. The Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF), which was then engaged with the government, did not accept the Provincial Councils. We wrote to late Rajiv Gandhi, then Indian Prime Minister. The letter was signed by the late Appapillai Amirthalingam, M. Sivasithamparam and myself. I tabled the letter in Parliament.
On his way from attending the SAARC summit in Nepal in November 1987, the late J.R. Jayewardene was invited to stop over in New Delhi. The TULF trio were also invited. Discussions took place on the 13th Amendment. We were informed that Jayewardene had given a written commitment to make improvements on the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. These agreements agreed upon were not enacted into law as war broke out between the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) and the LTTE.
During President Ranasinghe Premadasa's time, the Mangala Moonesinghe-led Parliamentary Select Committee emphasised the need for maximum possible devolution without compromising the unitary character of Sri Lanka. This was followed by then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga's time when the constitutional reforms proposals in 1995, 1997 and 2000 (all of which when Rajapaksa was a cabinet Minister) were formulated. In his inaugural address to the All Party Representatives Conference (APRC) and the multi-ethnic committee appointed to assist the conference, President Rajapaksa offered maximum devolution without compromising the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. Moving beyond the 13th Amendment has been accepted by successive governments. The com- mitment made by President Rajapaksa to Indian External Affairs Minister Krishna this week is consistent with the position that has prevailed. Within the framework of a united country, we want a reasonable devolution and a workable solution.
ON THE BREAKDOWN OF GOVERNMENT-TNA TALKS:
Talks began in January 2011. The TNA defined the contours of a political solution within the framework of a united, undivided Sri Lanka. These contours are strictly within the address made by President Rajapaksa in July 2000 to the inaugural meeting of the APRC and the multi-ethnic experts committee. The government delegation told us they would like to have our proposals in writing.
We gave our proposals in writing in February last year. The government delegation wanted more comprehensive proposals from us. This was given in writing again. We wanted the government delegation to respond to it in writing. Five months rolled by. Seven meetings took place.
The government was not coming up with proposals in writing. At the meeting on August 4, 2011, we sought the response of the government. It was not forthcoming. I told them I would not agree to a further date. I am not suspending the talks. I am not walking out. I also told them 'you were engaging in a cosmetic exercise with the TNA to gain political mileage.' This is whilst we remain empty handed.
Nothing is happening to the talks. I also told the government delegation that the moment their response is available, we can fix the date and time for talks. They invited us for a meeting on September 2. I met President Rajapaksa before that. He asked us not to demand a written response from the government. He suggested that all the documents I had referred to (e.g. Mangala Moonesinghe Parliamentary Select Committee etc) be brought into the negotiating process. This was agreed and the documents were brought in. The two sides resumed talks on September 16. Matters that transpired in my conversation with President Rajapaksa were recorded that day. They were approved and accepted.
President Rajapaksa wanted to discuss with me the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC). He told me bilateral talks would continue and that the consensus arrived at could be taken up at the PSC. After the September sessions, we had identified with the government delegation the issues to be discussed. We are not averse to participating in the PSC. But President Rajapaksa made a commitment that the bilateral dialogue would continue and a consensus would be arrived at for discussion at the PSC.
The minutes of the governmentTNA meeting for that day state, "Thereafter Hon. Nimal Siripala De Silva stated that the TNA must agree to join the PSC. The agreement reached here can be taken to the PSC. So the agreement reached here can be taken before the PSC as a joint TNA-SLFP proposal. Hon. Sampanthan stated that the terms of reference of the PSC that appear in the order paper were not acceptable and an alternative draft was given and the government delegation said that they will try and get the concurrence of the other parties. The TNA also agreed that if the TOR was amended in this way, once an agreement was reached with the government delegation which can be taken up before the PSC as suggested they would be able to start the PSC process……….."
We are not averse to the PSC. We want to go before it. But we cannot go empty handed. We have failed for one year. We do not want to name members to a PSC now. They will stop the talks. They now say we are boycotting. We are not.
FINAL REPORT OF THE LESSONS LEARNT AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION:
We have issued a 100 page report giving the TNA position on the final report. Our view is that the LLRC has not addressed accountability issues objectively. They have adopted a very limited approach to the whole question of accountability. It was a war without witnesses. Even our MPS were not allowed access.
In the second chapter of our report, we have noted the LLRC recommendations for a political solution, land issues, demilitarisation, resettlement of civilians, disarming of paramilitary groups, reference to the media, assistance to IDP families and several other issues. We have welcomed them. They need to be implemented if it is to bring benefits to our people. We have also pointed out that the Interim Report of the LLRC, formulated a year ago, has not been implemented. We are prepared to be of assistance to the government in implementing these recommendations.