13th September 1998

Compliance or commitment?

On the eve of Haa! Hoo! for elections, I wonder whether we really need to elect our representatives to the House, who are not really committed to serve the people.

I hereby express the grievance of the residents and the users of Jaya Road, Bambalapitiya, which has not been attended to, by our so-called people's representatives in the Colombo Municipal Council.

Jaya Road in Bambalapitiya extends from Galle Road to the railway track. The latter part of this road has not seen any repair for more than 20years.

Authorities contended that, the part of Jaya Road from Galle Road up to the point where it turns to the right into Nimal Road, is only the property of the Municipal Council and that the other section of Jaya Road beyond this point up to the railway is private property and hence the Municipal Council is under no obligation to repair this section.

This neglected part of the Jaya Road is not only used by the residents but also by hundreds of students of a well-attended school and a professional Institute.

It is their commitment to serve the nation. That is expected of them and not compliance to the rules and regulations which are contrary to the public interest.

Thamu S.
Bambalapitiya

That promotion

In last Sunday's 'Situation Report', Eleric Abeygoonewardena's promotion over A.C. Dep was cited as another case in which the most senior DIG had not been considered for post of IGP.

My father, Eleric Abeygoonawardena, joined the Police Force as a 5th class Sub-Inspector in 1931 whereas A.C. Dep, being a graduate, joined the force in the 1940's as an A.S.P. My father was promoted to the post of Inspector in 1940 and as an Asst. Superintendent in 1950.When A.C. Dep and my father were holding the rank of DIGs in the mid 1960's there were only five DIGs in all. At the time my father was promoted to the post of IGP he already had 10 years of experience over Mr. Dep. None of the other DIGs resigned over this appointment.

On reaching his age of retirement, he did not canvass the support of politicans for any extensions or diplomatic assignments.

Kumar Abeygoonewardena

Day not far off when ice will melt

Your Indian correspondent's report in The Sunday Times of August 30, is not only loaded with anti-Pakistan tirades, but contains a number of mis-statements disguised as objectivity. It smacks of typical Indian mindset towards Pakistan. However the only fact he could not conceal was that Kashmir is the key issue that bedevils the relationship between India and Pakistan.

While referring to Pakistan's non-paper insisting on withdrawal of Indian troops from Kashmir, he states that Pakistan attacked Kashmir in 1948 to force the Hindu Maharaja Hury Sing to accede to Pakistan. What a mockery of history your correspondent has made. It was India and not Pakistan which manipulated accession by the Hindu Maharaja of the Muslim majority state of Jummu and Kashmir in 1948 in utter violation of the agreed principle on which the partition plan was based.

Let us consult the history itself which is testimony that the state of Jummu and Kashmir was one of the 562 princely states which exercised varying degrees of internal autonomy under treaties with British authorities made during the period of colonial penetration. When British sovereignty over the states lapsed in 1947, the princes were advised to accede to Pakistan or India. When the Muslim ruler of the Hindu majority of Janagadh announced accession to Pakistan, the Indian government said the decision was "in utter violation of principles on which partition was agreed upon and effected". It then peremptorily invaded and occupied the state. Two months later, however the Indian government itself committed an " utter violation" of the principle on which partition was based when it manipulated accession by the Hindu Maharaja of the Muslim majority state of Jummu and Kashmir.

While referring to the tragic situation in Kashmir your correspondent has also called the representatives of the people of Kashmir the All Parties Hurriyeth Conference (APHC) as nothing but a defunct force. In his assessment it is not existing. Trade is booming and the tourist house boats on the picturesque Dal Lake in Srinagar are full. What a rosy picture he has painted of the Jummu and Kashmir, which is groaning in agony. If this is true, then what for are over 600,000 Indian troops there?

He also attributed to Pakistan that it is trying to get a third party facilitation to engage India due to US interest. Of course, Pakistan cannot trust the Indian leaders whose track record is such that they have gone back on all the bilateral and international commitments they made in the past 50 years. Had they honoured their international obligations, there would have been hardly any need to insist on a third party mediation, which is unavoidable to facilitate the process of dialogue.

Therefore there is no question of obliging Pakistan or Kashmir's APHC. It is the question of honouring the commitment India made before the United Nations. Now it can't escape. It was a pledge to the Kashmir's people by India, Pakistan and the United Nations. As long as the Kashmir question is not addressed in accordance with the wishes of the people of Jummu and Kashmir there could be no lasting peace in the region. The day is not far off when the ice will melt; freedom will dawn on Kashmir.

Shahid Abrar Awan
South Eastern University

Return to the Letters to the Editor Contents

Return to the Plus Contents