Terrorism did not stem from Language Act

While the Sinhala Jathika Sangamaya is loath to contradict or challenge the factual accuracy of the contents of a speech made by a Judge of our Supreme Court at a sitting of that Court, it is compelled to do so in respect of several statements that were contained in the speech made by Justice Wigneswaran at the ceremonial sitting of that Court held on March 7, to welcome Justice H.S.Yapa and himself . This necessity arises because those statements would be accorded much weight and credibility because they came from the lips of a Judge of the Supreme Court and are hence capable of creating in the minds of the uninformed, such as the diplomatic community, a misleading and adverse impression about our country, her history and the Sinhalese people.

Justice Wigneswaran says:-

"My stint as a judicial officer in the Northern and Eastern provinces during the turbulent period from 1979 to 1986 enlightened me as to the feelings and aspirations of the vast majority of the denizens of those two provinces. It is not devolution nor sharing of powers they seek. They seek the restoration of their rights. Rights which were snatched from them by virtue of a mathematical innovation where the majority in two provinces were added to the majority in seven provinces and thus made into a minority in the nine provinces. This was sought to be corrected when laws pertaining to the Reasonable Use of Tamil were formulated in 1958 and 1966. But even these were given up without understanding the implications involved.

I have always referred to an incident that used to happen when we were marble playing youngsters in school. Some of our seniors who were not prefects would pounce upon us suddenly and illegally confiscate all our marbles in order that they would themselves play with them. When we protested they would keep 90% of the marbles and offer us 10% and thereafter progressively increase it to about 20% forgetting that all the marbles were ours and the seniors had no right to confiscate in the first instance. The majority of those in the northern and eastern provinces were always Tamil speaking until independence…………"

These words would ordinarily convey to any person hearing or reading them that the Northern and Eastern Provinces always had both an independent existence as a separate entity from the other seven provinces of Sri Lanka as well as a majority of Tamil speaking inhabitants; and that the rights of those Tamil speaking inhabitants were robbed from them, and they converted into a minority by the Sinhalese after independence, (in the same way that the marbles of junior boys were "illegally confiscated" by the seniors),by those two provinces being amalgamated with the other seven Provinces.

This is factually incorrect for many rea sons. Firstly, according to the eminent Tamil historian Dr. Karghigesu Indrapala, the first permanent Tamil settlements in Sri Lanka, (which too were few in number), came into existence only in the 10th century and these were not in the northern or eastern provinces. Dr. Indrapala proceeds to say that "of the present day Tamil areas (sic) only the upper half of the eastern province and parts of the western coast had Tamil settlers in the 11th and 12th centuries." [ vide "Early Tamil Settlements in Ceylon"-Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society-1970 volume 13: pp. 43-63]. Thus, the territory of the present northern and eastern provinces could not possibly have "always" had a Tamil speaking majority – but were areas inhabited by the Sinhalese which had no Tamil speaking inhabitants at all until the 11th and 12th centuries.

Secondly, those who were "dispossessed" (like the boys who had their marbles "illegally confiscated") were not the Tamils but the Sinhalese and the "dispossessors" (like the "seniors" who "illegally confiscated" the marbles) were not the Sinhalese but the Tamils - for as Dr. Karthigesu Indrapala says:-

"The invasion of Magha [in the 13th century] with the help of Tamil and Kerala mercenaries was far more violent than the earlier invasions. Its chief importance lies in the fact that it resulted in the permanent dislodgment of Sinhalese power from Northern Ceylon, the confiscation of lands and properties belonging to the Sinhalese by the Tamil and Kerala mercenaries and the consequent migration of the official class and the common people to the South-Western regions. These factors more than any other helped the transformation of Northern Ceylon into a Tamil region and directly led to the foundation of a Tamil Kingdom there. In the second phase, with the foundation of an independent Tamil Kingdom, a deliberate policy of settling Tamils in the Jaffna District and the Wanni regions was followed by the first rulers of the Tamil Kingdom. This led to a migration of peaceful settlers from the Tamil Country. It was this peaceful migration that was largely responsible for the Tamil settlement of the Jaffna District. It was a deliberate and organized process which appears to have extended till the turn of the century." [Ibid: pp.61-2] 

Having been so forcibly dispossessed of their lands and properties in the North by Indian invaders, the Sinhalese were later dispossessed of their lands in the hill country too by the British invaders by means of the Waste Lands Ordinance and imported Indian Tamils being settled on their lands.

Thirdly, even the "Tamil Kingdom" referred to by Dr. Indrapala was, for the most part of its existence of about 400 years, a weak "Kingdom" which was mostly confined to the Jaffna Peninsula and never extended to any part of what is now the Eastern Province. When the Portuguese conquered that "Kingdom" in 1619 it encompassed only the Jaffna Peninsula and a small portion of the Wanni, extending along the coast to Mannar in the north-western coast and Mullaitivu in the north-eastern coast. The territory of the northern and eastern provinces as presently constituted did not constitute the territory of this short-lived "Kingdom" created by a foreign invasion, and those two provinces never ever had an independent existence. The territory of those two provinces was at all times an integral part of Sri Lanka. The present northern and eastern provinces were a creation of the British who divided the country into nine provinces for their administrative convenience in 1889 - thus, the northern and eastern provinces were not some independent entities possessed of some historical sanctity, but artificial demarcations of administrative divisions which were born of the administrative convenience of the British invaders and created by some lines drawn across the map of Sri Lanka by some unknown British surveyor. Accordingly, there never was a "a mathematical innovation where the majority in two provinces were added to the majority in seven provinces and thus made into a minority in the nine provinces."

At the commencement of his speech Mr. Wigneswaran said:-

"Singapore and Ceylon in the old days had the same problem. One country decided to give equal recognition to all four languages right from the beginning and that country flowers and flourishes. The other forced one language in preference to the others on all and that country is in precarious political turmoil."

These words give rise to the factually er roneous impression that the political tur moil, namely, separatist terrorism, in this country had its origin in the Official Language Act of 1956 which replaced English with Sinhalese as the Official Language of this country; and that the giving of the status of an Official Language to the languages of the minorities is a sine qua non for a multi racial country to "flower and flourish".

Separatism and hence separatist terrorism did not have their origins in the Official Language Act but in the cupidity and chauvinism and unabashedly racist politics of the political ancestors of the LTTE and other Tamil separatists such as G.G.Ponnambalam and S.J.V.Chelvanayakam, who could not bear to visualize the privileged position which the Tamils enjoyed under British rule being lost, and the Sinhalese attaining equality with them with the onset of independence. Thus, they first attempted to institutionalize discrimination against the Sinhalese by proposing to the Soulbury Commission in 1945 that constitutional provision be made for the permanent under-representation of the Sinhalese in both the legislature and the executive by means of a pernicious system which they, perhaps with a macabre sense of humor, described as "Balanced Representation". This pernicious proposal for overt and institutionalized racial discrimination against the Sinhalese was rejected by the Soulbury Commissioners with the terse comment:-

" We think that any attempt by artificial means to convert a majority into a minority is not only inequitable, but doomed to failure".

After this attempt at the domination of the entire Country by the minorities, of whom the Tamils were the dominant minority failed, Chelvanayakam for the first time articulated the idea of separatism on the 26th November 1947 ( nine years before the Official Language Act) when he said in Parliament:-

"If Ceylon is fighting to secede from the British Empire why should not the Tamil people if they feel like it, secede from the rest of the Country ?"

Two years later in 1949 (seven years before the Official Language Act) Chelvanayakam founded the Ilankai Thamil Arasu Kadchhi (the Lanka Tamil State Party) dishonestly labelled as the "Federal Party", and having rejected out of hand the very existence of a `Ceylonese Nation' comprised of all the citizens of all races of our land (the acceptance of which was so necessary for our newly independent Nation to "flower and flourish"), for the first time, expounded a 'doctrine' of the Tamils being a separate "Nation" from the Sinhalese (as opposed to being a separate "race" within a single Nation together with the Sinhalese and members of other races); and of that "Nation" having the right to "autonomy" and a right of "self determination" in over one third of the territory of Sri Lanka and two thirds of her sea coast. 

Thus, the Official Language Act was by no stretch of imagination the 'cause' of our turmoil, but rather a logical piece of legislation which was utilized by unscrupulous and equally opportunistic Tamil politicians to further their chauvinistic campaign for a separate state. The root cause of our present turmoil, therefore, is not the Official Language Act but the chauvinism and opportunism of Tamil politicians such as Chelvanayakam.

There is no logical basis for presuming that Singapore 'flowered and flourished' because it had four official languages or that it would have been in "precarious political turmoil" if only the language of the majority was "enthroned" as the official language of that Country – for Singapore's neighbouring multi-racial country, Malaysia, did "flower and flourish" with only the language of the majority, namely, Malay, being "enthroned" as the Official Language although the Malays constitute less than 57.7% of its population while the Chinese constitute 25.4% and Indians 7.2%. Both those countries 'flowered and flourished' because they had leaders of the calibre of Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir Mohammed.

The making of Sinhalese the Official Language does not and cannot consti- tute forcing that language on anybody or discriminating against the Tamils. It only meant doing what was logical, as was done in Malaysia, and being done in other multi-racial countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States of America by recognizing the language spoken by the majority as the Language of Administration of the country. 

Indeed, despite the turmoil they created in the country over the logical step of the language of the majority being made the Official Language of the country, even the Tamil chauvinists themselves have admitted by necessary implication that it is only right and proper that the language of the majority of a country should be its official language - for, in its manifesto for the General election of 1977, the Tamil United Liberation Front stated categorically that Tamil would be the official language of the proposed State of Tamil Eelam !! This was despite the fact that even if such a State comes into being, it would be a multi-racial country with a very significant Sinhalese minority !!

Even when Sinhala was the only official Language, there was no impediment on the use of Tamil. Thus, for example, a Tamil could, even then, receive his education from the nursery to University and answer all public examinations in Tamil: he could give evidence in or address Court in Tamil and was entitled to correspond with the Government in Tamil. Further, all Government gazettes and forms were printed in all three languages.

Thus, Sinhalese being the "official language" of the country only meant that it was the "dominant" language of the country.

Justice Wigneswaran proceeds to state:-

"Unless we recognize that the Tamil Language and its culture are to the Tamils what the Sinhala Language and culture are to the Sinhalese and therefore make Tamil the dominant language in the northern and eastern provinces requiring the study of it compulsory for all in those two provinces just as Sinhala is recognized as the dominant language of the other seven provinces, with English as the link language between equals, the wrong done by the enthronement of one language in 1956 could never be erased."

Thus, Mr. Wigneswaran sees nothing wrong in the Sinhalese who constitute the overwhelming majority in over 70% of the territory of the Ampara District and in over 60% of the territory of the Trincomalee District being compelled to learn Tamil or Tamil being made the "dominant language" in the northern and eastern provinces on the ground that that is the language of the majority within the boundaries of those two artificially demarcated Provinces. Clearly he does not consider such an act to constitute one language being "forced" "in preference to the others on all".

The Sinhalese have always constituted the overwhelming majority within the natural boundaries of Sri Lanka. Thus, if as Mr. Wigneswaran believes, there is nothing wrong or inequitable in compelling the Sinhalese who constitute a minority within the confines of the artificially demarcated boundaries of the northern and eastern provinces being compelled to study the language of the majority within those artificial boundaries, and that language being "enthroned" as the "dominant language" of those provinces, it must follow of necessity that there can be nothing unjust or inequitable in the Language spoken by the overwhelming majority of the People within the natural boundaries of Sri Lanka being "enthroned" as the "dominant language" or the "official language" of the entire country and the study of it being made compulsory for all in Sri Lanka.

Mr.Wigneswaran's reference to the "disabilities decreed on my community" are evidently based on Sinhala having been made the official language of the country. It follows from the foregoing that that which Mr. Wigneswaran terms disabilities are not in fact disabilities. In any event, the question of the official language being Sinhalese alone is now only of academic interest since Tamil too has been made an Official Language.

Addressing directly, the Attorney General (who is also a Tamil), Mr. Wigneswaran said:-

"Even though you Mr. Attorney and I are today in our respective honoured positions we cannot forget that two sparrows would not make a summer. In fact there were many more sparrows in high positions due to their intrinsic worth in almost every field during the middle of the last century. But we are today progressively depleted in numbers in this part of the Island and like the Burghers we too would soon be hardly heard of in Judicial, Legal or Governmental Service or even the Private Sector"These words are clearly capable of creating in the mind of him who hears or reads them, the erroneous impression that there is, in Sri Lanka, discrimination against Tamils on the grounds of race. 

The Constitution provides a remedy to any citizen who has been discriminated against on the grounds of race - namely a resort to the fundamental rights jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. While Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims and others have made numerous applications in respect of the violation of their fundamental rights by arbitrary and capricious acts amounting to unequal treatment before the law, illegal arrest and detention, torture and the curtailment of freedom of speech, there has hardly ever been an instance of an application having been made on the basis of discrimination on the grounds of race. The writer can only think of one such case which was instituted by a Tamil. 

If Tamils were in fact discriminated against on the grounds of race there can be no doubt that there would have been a plethora of Fundamental Rights Applications to the Supreme Court . The fact that there were hardly any such applications is clear proof that there is no discrimination against the Tamils. It is to be observed in this connection that when the Inspector General of Police went on leave, the person appointed to act for him was not the seniormost Deputy Inspector General A.S.Seneviratne, nor the next in seniority G.B.Kotakadeniya, both of whom are Sinhalese, but the third in seniority who is four years junior to both those officers, namely, E.T.Anandarajah, a Tamil.

It is true no doubt that there are, today, comparatively few Tamils in high positions in the Judicial, Legal and Public Services. It is, wrong however, to attribute this to discrimination. It is rather the result of three factors. Firstly, it is a result of the cream of the Tamil intelligentsia making use of the turmoil in the Country to seek greener pastures in the affluent West falsely alleging victimisation or danger to their lives - it would be recalled that even our former Ambassador to Germany Ms. Lakshmi Naganathan who, having returned to Sri Lanka suddenly decamped to the United States of America via Madras !! Secondly, it is the result of the Tamil youth, particularly of the Jaffna Peninsula who usually flocked to join the Judicial, Legal and Public Services joining the Tigers either voluntarily or through conscription and being far too busy killing and maiming soldiers, sailors, airmen, policemen and civilians - (mainly Sinhalese), and destroying property to even think of joining any such services. Thirdly, it is the result of Prabhakaran refusing to permit those within the parts of the country that are under his illegal rule to leave them. The Tamils, therefore, have only themselves to blame for the relative paucity of their numbers in high office and in those services.

Return to News/Comment Contents