Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

15 January 2017

Caste Based Discrimination

Last year, we did not celebrate Thai Pongal at our family temple in Thunaivi, Vaddukoddai, due to a group of youth playing loud music in the grounds next to our temple. That other property which is behind the home of high profile  President’s Counsel Mr Kanaganayagam Kanag-Isvaran is privately owned. After demonstrating my self-punishment by cancelling the celebrations, I went to the Jaffna Railway station to catch the train to Colombo. On the way I stopped at Our Lady’s church which we as a family often prayed at. There I received Pongal/Sweet rice made  by the workers. I felt deeply touched and made the connection to that area being my home-area by birth. It was as if my mother who prayed ardently at that church and to whom I paid my respects before the loud music was played – was blessing me. But that incident confirmed to me the ‘gap’ between my ‘class’ and the class that the youth belonged to.

Given that matters seemed to have improved, this year I granted approval for the ceremony to take place as usual at the temple. Later yesterday, I learnt that the same group of youth had illegally tapped into our temple electricity to play all night music and that they had done that previously on Karthigai Theebam night also. The latter celebration is significant in that it falls close to or on the day Tamil Heroes are celebrated by LTTE supporters. One such hero was Tamil Militant Kittu, in whose name a Tamil film Maaveeran Kittu has been produce. Following is an excerpt from Wikipedia about this connection:

[The film began production in July 2016, with Suseenthiran revealing that the film was about a warrior who fought for the people’s rights in 1985 and in no way related to the former LTTE militant Kittu. The shoot was held in Pazhani for a period of fifty days. Suseenthiran stated the idea of making the film had come to him after a member of the public had approached him at a shopping complex and requested that he made a film on the plight of Tamil people. ]

As per reports – Kittu and his group committed suicide around this time in 1993 in the waters near Hambantota – the area where there is controversy over Land allocation to Chinese.

The low caste leader in the above film – chooses non-violence as the pathway to redeem his people. Kittu – his younger brother was dedicated to higher education and willingly followed his elder brother’s leadership. That is a good example of redeeming oneself from caste-based discrimination. But I was reminded yet again yesterday that the above youth of Vaddukoddai where the first Political Declaration of Independence was made in 1976 – was not free from unjust discrimination. The young youth above ‘feel’ free because they are isolated.

Unjust discrimination happens when we favor or punish someone beyond our position authority. I now realize that I myself was effectively practicing racial discrimination by accepting less than my due for work performed. When we favor someone beyond their official position dues and they happen to be of a different race to us and we do not know of a particular reason why – the most apparent difference is taken as the reason. This may be race for some, age for others and so on. It’s not different to road accidents. Whether the authorities accepted it or not – I declared my reasons – as per my Truth and hence freed myself from contributing to such unjust discrimination as an apparent Indian. Unless someone else can point to a more valid reason – I am entitled to be taken as per my declaration, so long as I have established loss of earned benefits and opportunities.

Often there is criticism of Tamil leadership on the basis of unjust caste based discrimination. I have put myself through the test of starting from zero base and limiting myself to the commonly known merit based measures – i.e. – those known to them. The discovery is that by isolating themselves – they have lost the connection to the higher pathways of intellectual discrimination and unless this is balanced by deeper faith in God – these groups are worse off than they were before democracy – especially in terms of participating in higher experiences.

In the case of the above youth for example, they idle most of the day and are on their cell-phones often handed down from their overseas relatives. Our sacrifices of earned benefits and opportunities develop natural structures in our minds. Welfare monies without strings attached and beyond real need,  lead to disorders of the mind by developing a false sense of authority through physical possession/majority vote.

Given that here in Australia, Equal Opportunity Laws specify no discrimination on the basis of race – we Australians have the duty to neither punish nor favor on the basis of race. Justice Gyles as per my observations did identify with my reasoning – explained as follows in chapter 28 of my book ‘Naan Australian’:

[Judges who take only parts of my history  deliver judgments that are misleading.  In my complaint – against Ms Milena Jurasek, (Appendix 14, item 2 ) the legal team hired by Ms Jurasek’s employer  grilled me with questions about my performance.  I successfully defeated them.  Then I questioned Ms Jurasek who was my supervisor in that casual job. Their defence was based on the claim that my performance was not satisfactory.  During cross examination I asked Ms Jurasek whether she would confirm that she signed my weekly time sheets?  Ms Jurasek said ‘yes’.   Then I asked Ms Jurasek whether it is mandatory for  officers to verify whether they have received the goods and services before certifying for payment.  At that point – Dr. Griffiths who had unsuccessfully cross-examined / grilled me on the basis that my performance was not satisfactory – objected to my line of questioning.  Then Justice Gyles who was hearing  the case said he would allow the questioning because he could see value in it.  Justice Gyles was still new to the Judge’s system and hence his mind was still more active in its discriminative thinking, than were the minds of most other judges who heard  my matters. Ms Jurasek said ‘yes’ that it was necessary to verify performance before certifying time-sheets.  Then Ms Jurasek said words to the effect ‘Gaja if you had gone along with  me I would have continued with your services’. Justice Gyles was also to hear my complaint against Professor Alice Tay – the  President of  the Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission which complaint included the President’s ruling on my complaint against Milena. At this point, Justice Gyles said that he would arrange for someone else to hear the complaint against Professor Tay. Justice Madgwick was assigned to hear that matter – but as usual – there was no affidavit by Professor Tay about her use of Discretionary powers and therefore – there was no room for Truth in that Court. Milena was holding lesser position and hence was facilitated to provide an Affidavit.  The Defendants in the latest Defamation case – who hold lesser positions than Milena – were facilitated to ‘escape’ providing Affidavits or direct evidence as witnesses – in which capacity they are compelled to speak the Truth. All they had to do was pay and escape – thus bringing shame to us – their sponsors and therefore their damaging their dignity as Australians.

 When we returned after lunch break -  Justice Gyles asked me the final question ‘According to you – was the discrimination conscious or subconscious’  I said ‘subconscious’.  Then Dr. John Griffith – Milena’s barrister – jumped up and said that his client was young and her career would be damaged through an adverse finding!  Justice Gyles also dismissed my complaint as lacking in substance!  With that Justice Gyles dismissed my expectations of merit based hearing and judgment. 

Hence when I complained in our Court this time – I did not expect to win. I was registering my experience – through the laws I had actually practiced.  The Registry is responsible to Administer the proceedings and Judicial Administrators who are able to control their minds to not use discretionary powers when we file our applications should have been able to deal with the technicalities. That is essential in a Democratic Court.]

When objectively measurable inputs and  outcomes are recognized,  the most apparent difference in looks is to be taken as the reason for discrimination until established otherwise through laws and principles common to both sides. At the lowest level – one recognizes matter independent of the mind. Hence only the objectively measurable outcomes are used to mark rights and wrongs.

Where there are active measures used towards common thinking, the participant with deeper investment in that measure must rule. If this participant is not the judge – then the Court has the responsibility to facilitate self-judgment. When this facility is denied to a minority power – the right to reverse discrimination is earned to restore Equality in status. Justice Gyles who is now reported to be  Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, would need deeper insight into the system of Natural Justice – which ultimately balances the system through its own independent pathway.

In terms of Sri Lanka, Caste based discrimination is not unlawful. To the extent Northern Sri Lankans practice caste based discrimination unjustly, their contribution to the ethnic problem and their claim to Racial Equality become negative. This is not limited to the higher caste over the lower caste but also the lower caste who practice reverse discrimination beyond their entitlement. The entitlement is limited to action to preserve one’s sovereignty and not to attack another’s. If we look within for solutions – we would take into account the actions of rebels beyond this limit which led to killing of Tamil Politicians by rebels who were mostly of lower castes than the Political leaders. Likewise at National level – by Tamils ‘telling’ the Sri Lankan Government beyond the level of discrimination pain experienced by Tamils – due to Government’s policies and inactions. Likewise Sri Lankan Government at Global level in relation to their complaint against the LTTE – calling them Terrorists. To the extent one recognizes unjust discrimination one must renounce one’s authority to judge and punish on the claim of Terrorism. A child can become a parent’s equal in status but never above the parent in status. When minorities / children take authority above the parent – such move goes against natural laws and hence we lose the support of nature to develop reliable solutions.

As for Thunaivi, Vaddukoddai – we would continue to live there and strengthen our home-feelings – so that the Common Land / Mother Earth would do the needful to share and balance – towards preventing future wars.