Thursday 25 February 2021


Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

25 February   2021






Manifestations would be interpreted differently by different observers. They would all be true if they are read as per our own conscience. Yesterday when I wrote my article headed ‘THANK YOU COMMON DEFENCE SECRETARY’ I had not listened to the speech of the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister’s presentation at the UNHRC. Later when I listened – I learnt that the Government was also making connections between the UNHRC issue of alleged war-crimes with the Easter Sunday causal forces. We interpreted from different angles. But to the extent we are true to ourselves, our minds would naturally merge. To the extent we are true to the positions taken by us – we would naturally merge to form common structures.


Mine was to protect the investments made by all Sri Lankans in common pathways especially in education. The global measure develops from such common measures in each nation. To the extent I apply common measures, I contribute to raising the issue to global standards. My Sri Lankan education was good enough for me to perform outstandingly. I always upheld that my Sri Lankan qualifications were my highest. This meant that Australia was gaining from my Sri Lankan education. Following in an excerpt from my book Naan Australian (chapter 28) that confirms how I brought out my Truth by NOT reacting to the other side:


[Yesterday, 05 August 2013, was judgment day in matter 2012/80864:  Paramasivam v Sabanathan.  Around 3 p.m. on Thursday, 01 August, I received an email advice from the Supreme Court of New South Wales  that Judgment would be delivered on Monday, 05 August.  As soon as I received the email – I felt upset. Gradually I settled down and went into my Truth. Param also said ‘If it is negative – we will appeal’.  I appreciated that Param did not ever ‘calculate’ how much such moves cost us as a family. He has always been positive in this regard. Even when I took my complaint against the then Prime Minister John Howard to the High Court – Param willingly facilitated the money – knowing very well that I would be dismissed by that Court also.  But through real life with me, he must have known that I would not waste even a dollar.  So he is generous if I needed money.  My concern was not the money but whether as requested by Mrs. Saraswathy Sabanathan and her group, the Judge would ban me – not because Her Honour  believed that I needed to be banned but the lawyers hired by Mrs. Sabanathan’s team submitted 216 pages of in evidence to claim that I  was a vexatious litigant and in addition took up almost a full morning and part of the afternoon to argue their case through a barrister. I sat through the discussions – including about me being a mentally ill person. At the end when I had the opportunity to express my true feelings,  I said to Her Honour was words to the effect ‘If I were to be banned as a vexatious litigant – based on the applications by these Applicants – then I would seriously consider returning to Sri Lanka’.  I observed the immediate change in Her Honour’s attitude towards me.  Her Honour said finally that she would read my work more thoroughly and make a decision.  I felt that my  Truth as an Australian communicated to Her Honour’s Truth as an Australian. Towards this I had to ‘wait’ for layers and layers of Maya / Delusion to wear off. Those holding official positions within the Judiciary  were entitled  to make a living and hence I had to pay the price of ‘waiting’ and ‘listening’ as if I was immune to all the bad things being discussed in my name. I reminded myself again and again – that I was an owner and they were still paid employees. If the Court had to be a Sovereign Body – both sides – the one getting the ‘rights’ and the one getting the wrongs had to be within those Courts.  If they were ‘right’ and that is the way they were going on and on – then during that period at that place - I was wrong.  That’s when the path is clear for Truth to deliver Itself.  ]

Much of the UNHRC proceedings are similar to the above. The parallel of lawyers are the Governments active in this issue.


The folks at ground level are strongly influenced by the Diaspora which has become their elders. But little do they appreciate that, like Mrs Sabanathan and her group who came to Australia due to our sharing as family, the Diaspora would also ‘think’ that the war related matters are theirs to ‘possess’ for their own purpose. This could result in Sri Lanka becoming a war-zone – especially if these governments under the influence of the Diaspora ‘win’ by demoting Sri Lanka. At that level – all of us – including Tamils and Muslims living in Sri Lanka – lose. This would lead to all of us who feel ‘Sri Lankan’ would feel depressed.


The closest access to the Public thinking would be the media. In this instance, the English media.


The Daily Mirror presentation  headed ‘Sri Lanka and the Culture of Impunity – EDITORIAL highlights the following contradiction:

[In May 2010, in response to international allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity being committed during the closing stages of the civil war and calls for action against those responsible for these crimes, then President Mahinda Rajapaksa appointed the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Committee (LLRC) to make recommendations regarding measures that needed to be taken……………….

The fact that the LLRC report acknowledged, “That considerable civilian casualties had in fact occurred during the final phase of the conflict” and “that shells had in fact fallen on hospitals causing damage and resulting in casualties” contradicted the government’s claims to the contrary. ]

The following was also highlighted:

[During the JVP uprisings of 1971 and 1988/89 some of the worst atrocities were unleashed on civilians by the armed forces, para military groups and the rebels, still no perpetrators prosecuted. ]

This confirms a common weakness which when neglected, would become exponentially powerful when we ‘react’ emotionally instead of responding through our feelings of ownership. This is also the ‘catch’ in Democracy where the receiver of majority votes wins to occupy the position. But to own that position one has to be true to that position. If this is not possible then one needs to use a common structure consciously all the time – to be ‘seen’ to be right.

In my Australian experiences, I came to a point where I was ‘giving up’ on myself. I wrote my letter of resignation on 11 August 1998. Some insiders expressed their need for my services – each in their own way. Dr David Garlick of Sports Medicine had the courage to expressly support me, including by ‘employing’ me. I finally officially stopped working in the substantive position on 14 October 1998. From 15 October I started working in my contract position which was my parallel of Gandhi living with the masses. On 05 November 1998 holy powder manifested on my picture of Swami Sathya Sai Baba. Even though I was not a devotee at that time, I had the picture because it was given to me by the mother whose son was killed by Tamil youth in Madras during the 1983 riots. They make perfect sense now, but back then it was all very painful. It was the ownership part of my pain that prevented me from ‘reacting’. Hence my current services are towards development of ownership by respecting the oldest known ancestor/elder in that area / group. The rest happens through the Universal power of Ownership.

Nations such as UK, Canada and India, recruited a high proportion of Tamils as refugees on the basis of war related pain. If they had believed that the government was not responsible – then they had the humanitarian duty to leave it as a local issue and help the government to defeat the LTTE militarily. Given that successive Sri Lankan governments had made it a global issue – the incumbent government is accountable to all those who contributed to making it a global issue. Global issues can produce outcomes that we do not ‘like’. But to the extent we continue to be engaged – the outcomes confirming our Belief WILL happen.

Hence a vote against Sri Lanka at UN level must be taken also as a vote against armed rebellion – including by Sinhalese.



No comments:

Post a Comment