Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

07 April  2019

Unitary State means no Dowry

The email message stated as follows:

[Please view in the tube on how M.A Sumanthiran, the elected spokesman of the Tamils, bluffs his way during Thantai Chelva's birth anniversary. 

He praises the contribution of  Chelva, but he failed to remember a couple of years ago R.Sampantham declared that  Chelva's Vaddukkoddai Resolution is now out of date. 

What is the aim of Sumanthiran praising Thantai.  It is another of his election stunts]
https://www.facebook.com/groups/112416142821431/permalink/376221959774180/

Vaddukoddai Resolution is Not -  Leader Chelva’s only Resolution. It is Leader Chelva’s also. To my mind, Vaddukoddai Resolution happened  because of the power of those who returned to Northern Sri Lanka, including to Vaddukoddai, after earning money in Malaysia for which locals born in Northern Sri Lanka became the heirs.  Mr Chelvanayakam’s family is one of the families that returned from Malaya and Mr Appapillai Amirthalingam was the local leader who was Sri Lankan made. In democracy, one needs more heir-power than elders-power. Vaddukoddai had more such heirs than KKS – Mr Chelvanauakam’s electorate.  

The then Sri Lankan government tried to nullify the Vaddukkoddai Resolution which is in essence the nuclear power that supports the efforts of the Global Tamil Community currently calling for war-crimes inquiry. The 1983 Amendment to the Constitution includes the following through article 157A:

[No person shall, directly or indirectly, in or outside Sri Lanka, support, espouse, promote, finance, encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate State within the territory of Sri Lanka.]

Article 1 & 2 state as follows:

1.Sri Lanka (Ceylon) is a Free, Sovereign, Independent and Democratic Socialist Republic and shall be known as the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

2. The Republic of Sri Lanka is a Unitary State.

One could conclude that article 157A confirms the above Unitary structure. That is by law. But by faith we need not be Unitary.  Hence we are able to practice multiculturalism including due to religion. But this should not be extended beyond the borders of our faith – including to politics and common governance. The requirement of articles 1 and 2 – were breached in 1972 and in 1978 through articles 6 and 9 respectively which render Buddhism foremost place. Hence the Constitution was disorderly and illogical from 1972.

When a system is disorderly, one needs to rely on Truth for order. To majority Sri Lankans the closest version of common Truth is faith in our respective religions. Due to articles 1 and 2,  we needed to not formalize religion through law. Every article in the constitution from article 9 onwards becomes invalid due to article 9 breaching the logic of articles 1 and 2.

Article 9 is in essence the 50:50 (50% seats for Sinhalese and 50% for Tamils and Muslims) recommended by Mr GG Ponnambalam in 1939. Between article 6 of the 1972 constitution and the Vaddukkoddai Resolution 1976, the former was in breach of the Unitary State requirement. 1976 Declaration was in fact confirming the provisions of article 6 of the 1972 constitution – i.e. Two states – one for Buddhists and another for non-Buddhists.

Mr GG Ponnambalam’s grandson Mr Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam would have discovered the above and educated Tamils if he had not been distracted by militant politics.

During the testamentary case proceedings of my brother in law Mr Subramaniam Yoganathan of Vaddukoddai, Mr Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam’s associate represented our side – the objecting respondents’ side. My husband rejected the claim of equal share to all siblings without gender based distinction – as dowry and muthusum (heritage) , as provided for by Thesawalamai law – a law that majority Jaffna Tamils understand in terms of marriage and dowry. That is the Federal structure that most Tamils would relate to. As Mr Sumanthiran explained in the above mentioned presentation, men in a family were a diverse group as were women. Equal division means Unitary structure. Dowry for daughters and Muthusum for sons means – Federal structure. THAT is a language that the ordinary Tamil would relate to on the basis of their home culture. Those who claim no dowry – including the LTTE – are claiming Unitary state as the better structure. As per my observation, Mr Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam’s associate did not oppose the Equal share distribution because he lacked wisdom in Thesawalamai and therefore Federal structure.

So, if Mr Sumanthiran took dowry – he is entitled to claim Federal structure at political level. Likewise, Mr Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam. But prior to claiming entitlement to  Federal structure – they must acknowledge makers of Thesawalamai law as their ancestors. All those who claim to have renounced the dowry system – as my two sisters in law of Vadukoddai claimed – are claiming Unitary state structure in provincial and national governance. Their children who were ‘imported’ by us to Australia – probably like militants -  contributed to the Equal share basis – which naturally opposes any side that claims Federalism.

Our real constitution is our own Truth expressed in the language  of the people we claim to represent. Now, unless Mr Wigneswaran, Mr Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam and Mr Sumanthiran confirm with dignity that they took dowry – they are NOT entitled to represent dowry paying and receiving Tamils. They are also not entitled to claim Federal structure at National level. If at family level, they did not take dowry, then their right at National level is to claim Unitary state. Can’t have one system for family  and another for Nation. This is how Sri Lanka’s cricket legend, Mevan Pieris presented this philosophy when writing in response to my article ‘Race & Caste’:

[Nice to hear from you again. You certainly have a computerised brain. So interesting to read what you have to say. Great girl. It reminded me of the Indian cricket commentators of my childhood " what a lovely shot. four more to Manjrekar and four more to mother India" Hahahaaaaa . Yes the concept of mother used here by the commentator reflects both a genuine love for the integrated country consisting of many states and the integrated team of players as well. A four to Manjrekar meant a four to India as well. In that context we have but one motherland Ceylon ( now Sri Lanka) made up of two lands. The lands of the Tamil majority and that of the Sinhala majority. The cricket team that carries Wigneswaran and Wickremasinghe batting together for motherlanka is bound to produce a record breaking partnership. Let the commentator say " One more beautiful cover drive by Wigneswaran and four more to Wigi and four more to mother Lanka" or will the commentator say " Oh my God what a sad state for mother Lanka. Wicki calls Wig for a single and runs half way and turns back runs and Wig in full cry is run out " Hahaa haaaaaa. Take your lessons from King Cricket my dear friend. It is high time that we all took to team sports in a big way. ]

I responded as follows:

[Thank you Mevan for that beautiful picture. I do not know about the team carrying Wigneswaran and Wickremesinghe. But I do identify fully with the success of the team formed by Dushan Perera and I – representing that third Nation of Sri Lankans who do not need land to claim ownership. When we score  – it’s four for Dushan or Gaja and 16 for Mother Lanka. ]

The judges who ruled that my brother in law’s estate be distributed equally – are claiming Unitary state structure. This includes highly respected  judge Elancheliyan. But Truth manifested through Administrative process to block the distribution by Mallakam District Court against whose registrar we have initiated Administrative action for administering the distribution after the Petitioners claimed and won ‘No Administration’ and the decision of the Mallakam District Court was ruled by Judge Elancheliyan to be interlocutory.   Which global court do we take this matter to? If we do – then are we not confirming the serious disorder in Northern Judiciary – despite the rich legal intelligence that the above Tamil politicians claim to have ????  Is that not how the Sri Lankan government claiming Sinhala only would also feel about UN inquiry? What a mess!!!!