Gajalakshmi Paramasivam- 16 June   2016  

Bonds v Arms

The hot topic in Sri Lankan Political circles is whether the services of Mr. Arjuna Mahendran, the Governor of Central Bank ought to be terminated or not?  - [Daily News article Wanted (or Not) ?]

Given that the appointment of Mr. Arjuna Mahendran  was political – one cannot use Administrative base to remove such a person and claim to uphold Buddhist Dharma as required by Article 9 of the Sri Lankan Constitution.

As per the Daily News report:

[At a special meeting held last week, several SLFP Ministers representing the national unity government voiced their serious concerns over the re-appointment of Mahendran. Among them were UPFA General Secretary Mahinda Amaraweera and Lasantha Alagiyawanna. They said any attempt to re-appoint Mahendran as the Central Bank Governor would reflect badly on the government.

“Serious allegations have been leveled against him. The public has lost their faith in the person holding the top post of the Central Bank. We need to go back to villages and engage in politics. We cannot go before our supporters and justify such decisions,” Alagiyawanna said, speaking at the meeting.]

The above ministers were part of the group that had custody over  Administrative power when Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa was President. The parallel of the Central Bank Governor’s role  was held by Mr. Gotabaya Rajapaksa in the war issue. To my mind, it is no coincidence that the article has combined the two ‘projects’ as if they were one. Both heads were political appointments.

The war ‘project’ was actively discussed in villages and it has been an active political issue. The link by the villagers was made to Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa on the one side and Mr. Velupillai Prabhakaran on the other. If SLFP supporters understand the war issue enough to talk about it at home – UNP supporters would understand cash issues enough to talk about it at home – but only if there is opposition to the Government at the level the villagers relate to. They need to ‘see’ to understand and relate or have the actual Experience.

Villagers who silently endorsed the purchase of weapons that kill outside the Administrative processes, carry that karma. Their votes come with that karma.  This kind of karma  would prevent them from raising their thought order to the higher level of logic and/or making the connection between Cause and Effect – as in the system of karma. Only those who disciplined, punished and/or actively rejected such excessive investment in arms to kill their own – at the time it happened -  have the moral authority and the drive to criticize someone using public position to make a personal cash profit, in the same environment. To my mind, there would be very few SLFP supporters of that category.

The article lists the credentials of Mr. Mahendra. Sri Lanka has moved further and further away from the Administrative system that upholds law and order. Hence such high credentials would take leaders away from the villagers. Such leaders would work to impress outsiders through their cleverness. This often leads them to become Ravanas (those with physical and cash power). While Sri Lanka needs Ramas (those with enough goodness to share with the whole) the current government needs Cash Ravanas to block the resurgence of Arms Ravanas.

As per the article:

[Mr. Vijith Vijayamuni Soysa, addressing a meeting in the Moneragala district, lashed out at the attempts to make Gotabhaya Rajapaksa the deputy leader of the party. He said the former Defence Secretary was responsible for driving away Muslims from the SLFP at the last Presidential election]

Muslims on the other hand are not likely to focus too much on the Bonds issue. Their strength comes from their business skills. An Administrator would choose status and power above cash. A Business person would be ready to lose status and theoretical power to gain cash. That is what Democratic Project Management is all about. It starts from Zero Administrative power over the other side.

I was surprised to note the name of Mr. Chandra Jayaratne in the group that brought Fundamental Rights Application against Mr. Mahendran. I crossed paths with Mr. Jayaratne over email communication rules – during the period following the release of the report of Sri Lankan Airlines – which is of heritage value to me. As per my intuition – Mr. Jayaratne was on the side of Mr. Weliamuna – the main author of the report. Given that Mr. Jayaratne has demonstrated his inability to appreciate the need for zero base beginning in business, as  confirmed through their petition against Mr. Mahendra on behalf of the Nation.

Merely finding fault  does not entail one to Good-Governance certificate. One needs to have had the experience deeply enough to hold the Problem and the Opportunity in common. Such a person is a natural governor in that environment. Neither Mr. Mahendran nor Mr. Jayaratne have this quality in terms of Sri Lankan Nation. 

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam- 15 June   2016  

American Tamils’ Fear

I am no fan of Mr. Sumanthiran due to him not giving recognition to my work on equal footing as those carrying grand titles. But I could not identify with the claim by American Tamils that according to their vision ‘Mr. Sumanthiran is going to play a second fiddle to the Sri Lankan Ambassador’ – (Colombo Gazette article – ‘Leading Tamil diaspora groups in the US slam Sumanthiran’)

The way we picture something that is commonly visible to all, confirms our mind order. As Americans, one would expect the above groups to appreciate that the way they interpret the visit by Mr. Sumanthiran may not be the way Mr. Sumanthiran himself would interpret the purpose of his visit. Given that it has been established with the aid of Americans also – that the Sri Lankan mind order is different to that of the American, one would expect there to be differences in interpretations. But all genuine interpretations as per the conscience of the person/group – would reach a common destination. The pathway taken in this instance by the American Tamils is likely to lead them to Tamils as a global community. But Mr. Sumanthiran, as part of the leading Opposition in Sri Lankan Parliament -  has the responsibility to take the pathway to becoming global – not as a Tamil only but as a Sri Lankan. Towards this, he is entitled to use Common Sri Lankan facilities – including those in the USA. If the groups could call themselves ‘American’ then they must respect at Equal level the right to be ‘Sri Lankan’.  In addition, to this general value – Mr. Sumanthiran has the DUTY to use the facilities of the Government as his so long as he takes the position of Opposition to the other half.

Mr. Sumanthiran may or may not confirm his adverse position to the Government in the forthcoming meeting with American leaders. But to judge one must wait - until his contribution either way is published. Premature judgment is often the way of those who take higher position than the judged – but by avoiding the official pathway. That was the Tamil contribution to the war. If these Tamils are doing likewise in America also – then they are Abusing the ‘freedom’ they have now that they did not have in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka may be less than America to them but it should not be to Mr. Sumanthiran. If it were – he would be demoting his own position in Sri Lankan Parliament.

As per this report:

‘The statement said the non- official body that invited Sumanthiran to the US is called the “Congressional Caucus on Ethnic and Religious Freedom in Sri Lanka”. This group has no influence or standing in the US Congress or with the US Government and is run by a junior Member of Congress and occasionally one other senior member shows up for a short time.

Tamils for Obama and American Tamil Forum claimed Sumanthiran used the group to get himself invited to Washington DC to meet other policy makers to convey to them his views on the new Government.’‘

The influence of a true American is far more valuable than that of member of the US Congress or the US Government who holds such membership for individual benefits – of money and/or status. It’s not different to taking the lower Community pathway of Tamil only or Sinhala only to feeling ownership of Land and Culture. Mr. Sumanthiran – who demonstrates his higher educational values – may be preferring to take the higher common Sri Lankan pathway rather than the Tamil only pathway. If the Truth he discovered as a Tamil is mover valuable to him and his group – that the values he is developing through the Common Sri Lankan pathway – then the Sri Lankan pathway would work against him realizing Independence. If the Truth he discovered as a Tamil is more valuable to him and his group than the values he thinks he enjoys through the Sri Lankan pathway – then he would be wise to take the Tamil Only pathway to becoming global and independent. No person/group that calls her/him/itself American has the right to think of another without such National affiliation. When they do – they are taking position above the official Tamil Leaders and that has the effect of diminishing the self-confidence of the Sri Lankan Tamil Leaders. This works against Independence.

  

The Common destination is Independence. It is most appropriate that one who has had the Sri Lankan Experience shares the wisdom with Americans who continue to struggle against the gap between Independence and Freedom. The Diaspora’s pathway by definition would be different to that of the pathway of Residents. One does not have the right to enforce its ways on the other. We are all entitled to use the Common outcomes to strengthen our own Experiences and structures through which we are developing our heritage. To be valuable to the next generation and / or to wider world – such heritage needs to be the Truth we discovered as individuals and/or as members of a group – be it Community, Nation or the Globe.

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam- 14 June   2016  

Low Paid Upcountry Tamil Worker

Sinhalese Heritage or Sri Lankan Heritage to Australian Senate?

We learnt today that Mr. Jagath Bandara of Sri Lankan origin has been nominated by the NSW Labor Party to the Senate ticket in the upcoming  Federal elections. As per Sri Lankan News:

Jagath is originally from Sri Lanka and he is the first ever Sri Lankan person of sub continent heritage and the community to be nominated for a Federal Senate ticket by the NSW Labor party. Senate Candidate Jagath Bandara in his statement to ‘Ada Derana’ said, “Ever since the day I arrived in this country, I have tirelessly worked with all sectors of our diverse community, worked hard collectively to bring justice for low paid employees and help many workers have the voice they deserve in their respective jobs. The trust that the community has shown in me is an honour and I am grateful for the recognition given to my work.

It has been nearly 20 years since I commenced working with the Union Movement – AMWU and have continued to do so until today.”

What is this ‘heritage?’ Is it of positive or negative value? If Mr. Bandara arrived in Australia from Sri Lanka – 20 years ago – he is one of those who developed the war-heritage that we carry as Sri Lankans. This is naturally shared with others of that community. To my mind, one who is not able to take such ownership is not capable of contributing to policy.

The name suggests that Mr. Bandara is of Sinhala ethnic origin as I am of Tamil ethnic origin. Officially speaking the divisions between the two ethnicities were the root cause of the war in Sri Lanka. One who leads needs in politics needs to be able to identify with and represent the group and not speak as an individual.

In Australia, when I felt that merit basis would not take me any further, I identified  with myself as Sri Lankan – the way mainstream Australians pictured me. This completed the picture of Truth at that level and THAT to me is the Australian heritage I carry with me as a global citizen.  

Had Sinhalese Political leaders likewise carried their Colonial heritage, with dignity – they would not have invoked their past karma which led to Tamils reacting and invoking theirs and hence the  war in Sri Lanka.

It is now common knowledge that the immediate past President of Sri Lanka relied on horoscopes to determine the timing of elections. Horoscopes confirm our positive as well as negative heritages. As an individual, Mr. Rajapaksa still has status in Sri Lanka – confirming that the horoscope reading was not wrong. In fact – it confirmed that Mr. Rajapaksa had stopped identifying with his own Party and therefore his fate/horoscope was different to that of the Party’s.

If indeed Mr. Bandara carries Sri Lankan heritage – then it has to be negative in any Nation that is accredited with leadership status in Democracy. Our identities – whether recognized by us or by others in our environment - group us for political purposes. If majority members of the Australian Community of Sri Lankan origin naturally recognize us as Sinhalese or Tamils – then at group level that is our identity. On that basis – Mr. Bandara has Sinhala heritage. This could be activated during times of conflict between Tamils and Sinhalese – unless Mr. Bandara has identified himself through Sri Lankan heritage – as I did. A heritage could be an asset or a liability. Where one experiences costs greater than benefits by the time one reaches the end of that current pathway   – one automatically develops positive heritage value. Where one experiences benefits more than costs – one automatically develops negative heritage value. Unless the experience of an individual is deep enough to override group values – the heritage of the group is also the heritage of the individual. The average Sinhalese carries negative heritage value in terms of Equal Opportunity within the workplace.

Unless there has been dramatic improvements over  the past 10 to 15 years Mr. Bandara’s nomination here in Australia, contributes towards covering-up  Australia’s weakness in terms of Racial Equality. All Australians of Sri Lankan origin need to think against such contributions to preserve their own unique identity and confirm the struggles experienced by them here in Australia. If Mr. Bandara did not face such challenges – then he is not eligible to claim Sri Lankan heritage. He has the responsibility to use merit base ONLY.  

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam- 13 June   2016  

St. Anthony’s Church  – Kochchikade – Sri Lanka –

http://www.omlanka.net/news/other-news/2041-kochikade-st-anthony-s-church-festival-held.html

Spiritual Powers

Today is the day we celebrate the feast of St. Anthony. I have felt the Blessings of St. Anthony during my times of need – including in relation to Legal experiences. I guess it was after Sir Anthony Mason – the then Chancellor of the University of NSW who is a celebrated legal expert here in Australia – instructed the Deputy Vice Chancellor to carry out an investigation into my complaints that I started connecting St. Anthony to legal experiences. The faith was always there – thanks to my parents. This was a specific pathway – which was reaffirmed today – 13 June 2016.

I was going through the court papers regarding my complaint to the Colombo Courts – against an unlawful occupier of my land in Colombo. I read through the evidence given by Cousin Bala who passed away a couple of years back and thanked him. That land was bought, out of much sacrifice on my part. The primary judgment was not in my favor and I am now preparing to represent myself in the Court of Appeal. The more I went through the papers myself – the more I realized that I was needed to establish the Truth and that the lawyers had missed many important ‘facts’ that have been coming  to my attention. It was as if those ‘facts’ were saying to me to take notice of them. One such very important ‘fact’ was located this morning. My husband knows to read Sinhalese but does not understand the meaning. I know enough Sinhalese to speak and also work out the meaning but lack the knowledge to read or write. Together – we were able to workout the ‘fact’ registered in the court papers. Even though we had paid for the translation – this ‘fact’ was not in the translation. I felt again – that it was a miracle on this holy day. I thanked St. Anthony and continued to work on my paper. I felt that Bala’s spirit was with us through my husband. Bala was fluent in Sinhalese and I believe that to the extent my husband was receptive to him, Bala would work through him to support me.

Then when I looked up ‘Sri Lankan News’ I came across the Ceylon Today  article ‘BROTHER’S SPIRIT PROTECTING SISTER’ which is about a sister believing that her brother who has passed away was helping her spiritually. I was touched by that story and went on to look for a photo of St. Anthony of Kochchikade; Colombo – for my article. Then I noted the picture of Neelan Thiruchelvam who was one of the best legal minds of our times and yet was killed by those who were seeking premature freedom. The pictures were on the same page of OMLANKA website. To me it was no coincidence that I came across this on this holy day. This meant that whatever the Court of Appeal may say – I am a winner in the world of Truth. I have  the Experience of my Belief. This would help me support those who need support to recover from the blows of the official systems. This is possible only where we go BEYOND the official system and not take shortcuts to freedom.

As I keep saying to those who do not seem to care about logical connections beyond those they can make – we know the connection between Cause and Effect when we have the Experience. Towards this we need to bring the other side into ourselves. Then we ‘see’ the other side while we are on our side as part of  our side. At the physical level we cannot ‘see’ both at the same time. Hence the delay in outcomes in the vertical – time based system. But in democracy the ‘other’ side needs to be seen instantaneously – as our the other side of our Truth. Towards this we need to come down to that level and eliminate all authority from rights for us and wrongs for the other side. Hence Equal status to opposition in Parliament even though the 2^nd highest party does not seem Equal in a system where  vote of every  citizen is equal to the other . That gets rid of the ‘advantage’ one side or the other may have due to familiarity. Once we take authority – we limit ourselves to one system. If we identify with the opposition as our Equal – then when we combine – we are able to ‘see’ their other side.

Authority is often taken on the basis of merit in the past. Then we are NOT able to ‘see’ the other side. Where no authority is taken – the connection between cause and effect becomes clear. Democracy clears this pathway by allocating Equal status to the winner of 2^nd highest votes. But those who cling to the past while enjoying democratic leadership status – keep losing power by failing in their duty to produce outcomes to confirm completion.

We get almost instantaneously – the answers to our Google Searches. We do not seek to find out how that system works. But to the extent we are able to identify with the outcomes shown – we rely on that system. Towards this, such ‘outcomes’ of work need to be as public as possible with least ‘attachment’ to having custody over them. In other words, they need to be Common. The higher the pathway – the greater the Commonness. Belief, brings the other side to us – whenever we are in need. Our credit is written when we invest genuinely through any avenue available to us. The difference between out costs and benefits – when we surrender to the experience – is that contribution to Common faith at that place at that time. The longer it stays there – the higher the value until it becomes instantaneous.

St. Anthony of Kochchikade is such a Common place where all ethnicities come together. It’s a  place that keeps that Common spiritual Energy that all of us with faith  could drawn on. With such sacred places – Sri Lanka would continue to be a strongly multicultural  nation. Thank you St. Anthony and thank you Neelan the Hindu husband of a Muslim lady. 

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam- 10 June   2016

Common Minorities have Equal Rights

Since returning from Sri Lanka, after a spell of about a month and a half, I have been focused on preparing my arguments in the case regarding my land in Colombo. The ruling in the District Court was unfavorable to me and the matter is at Appeal stage. It has been since 1999. At this point – I appreciate the greater value of Common Application rather than personal outcomes. I was so strongly  focused that I did not attend to even the problem with my bigpond email account. The more I went into my case – the more I appreciated the Sri Lankan ethnic problem also – as if I was the problem. When I own the problem I already have the opportunity.

I discovered through this latest research, that Prescriptive Rights in Sri Lanka are necessary where the Common Legal pathway is not accessible to the less educated person without the monetary resources to buy the legal expertise. Prescription Ordinance is the parallel of Article 9 of the Sri Lankan Constitution through which Dharma (Righteousness) is facilitated throu8gh Buddhist pathway. The structure of Article 9 however is, incomplete and is therefore inappropriate in Democracy.

Then this morning, for the first time since returning from Sri Lanka, I felt the urge to read the Sri Lankan news. There it was – the very confirmation I needed in terms of Time & Place being reservoirs of Energy. Wherever, whenever,  Truth is manifested the place and time get empowered. All those to whom that place is home – are empowered by that Truth. All those who believe in someone who gave form to Truth at that time are also empowered by that Truth. Those powers would never be in conflict with each other. The article through which the confirmation came is ‘Tamils have right to self-determination – Sampanthan’ published by Ceylon Today:

“Opposition and Tamil National Alliance (TNA) Leader Rajavarothayam Sampanthan recently said, the Tamils were a unique race and had historically been living in the country's North and East.

Sampanthan was speaking at the ITAK office premises, in front of the Athiyadi Pillaiyar Temple, in Vaddukottai, at a meeting organized by TNA parliamentarian E. Saravanabhavan.

He said, “We (Tamils) are a unique race. We have been living in this country, historically, in the North- East and have the right to self-determination. Those need to be recognized.”

The parallel of this in my Colombo land matter is the claim by the physical occupier – a Sinhala Buddhist – that he owned the land by physical possession over a time period in excess of 10 years which included the years of war during which my Attorneys were unable to physically inspect to secure the land from Trespassers. In that matter that Sinhala Buddhist is the parallel of Mr. Sampathan claiming the right to self-determination based on physical occupation of North & East of Sri Lanka which claim was ‘possessed’ by armed rebels led by the LTTE.

As a Sri Lankan lawyer, Mr. Sampanthan would be able to identify with the need to satisfy ‘ownership rights’ through physical possession, required as follows:

1)      Undisturbed and Uninterrupted Possession over a stipulated period

2)      Through a Title which has to be

3)      Adverse to OR Independent of the Documentary  Title holder using the legal pathway.

My interpretation and application of this principle of ‘ownership by possession’ which is what ‘Sinhala Only’ and ‘Tamil Only’ in Sri Lanka and ‘White Only’ in Australia is explained through the following excerpt from my draft submission to the Sri Lankan Judiciary:

[It is submitted that where a claim is confirmed/proven  on the basis of evidence, the return pathway is also valid.  The evidence is the visible and/or known part of the claim. The unseen soul of the claim is the Belief. One could therefore start with the claim and end up with the evidence or v.v. The two would be in harmony where the claim is valid.

The validity of this is highlighted as follows by Hon Justice Saleem Marsoof, P.C., J.  in Storer Duraisamy Yogendra  &  Balasubramaniam Thavabalan  Vs. Velupillai Tharmaratnam:

“The decision of five judges of this Court in the Rajendran Chettiar case is not only binding on this Bench as it is presently constituted, but also reflects the practice of Court both in England as well as in Sri Lanka. As Lord Denning, M. R. observed in Salter Rex and Co. v. Ghosh [1971] 2 All ER 865 at page 866 – “Lord Alverstone CJ was right in logic but Lord Esher MR was right in experience. Lord Esher MR‟s test has always been applied in practice.”

It is submitted that the above principle applies also in the case of Prescriptive Rights – where the Absolute value of Belief would have developed through an independent pathway, is respected and recognized as being of higher value than the legal title which often includes theory which may not be applicable to local environments. It is submitted that Logic is relative whereas Belief is Absolute in value.

To be accepted at that level – pure of relative logic – Belief needs to stand on its own rights and not be relative to the logic of any alternate system – in this instance legal title. It is submitted that to be entitled to ownership through the logic based legal pathway – one does not need Belief. Knowledge that one has satisfied the requirements of the legal pathway alone is enough.]

One who relies solely on experience – has the authority of Truth to claim the right to Self-Determination through a pathway Independent of the legal pathway. That is the Spiritual pathway. One who relies on theory / law – common to a group – on the other hand needs to demonstrate the ‘other’ side – Adverse to the positive side. The Tamil Tigers  who did not have much investment in the Common pathway chose the pathway of Independence and hence demanded total separation including by blocking the Tamils voting in the 2005 Presidential elections. The current Chief Minister of Northern Province is following along that pathway of Prescriptive Rights which replaces the investment he made in the Common Sri Lankan pathway. The problem with this pathway is that it isolates Tamils who lack belief that   they are Tamils. They  therefore tend to stay within that area – as did the lower caste who eventually disenfranchised themselves through separation – as good example of this being the village of Thunaivi – not far from the very place - Athiyadi Pillaiyar Temple, in Vaddukottai, where Mr. Sampathan made the above claim. Relative to those who chose to go outside Vattukottai – those in Thunaivi and indeed Vattukottai itself – have shorter visions. Similarly – relative to those who have gone outside Northern Province, those in Northern Province have shorter visions. The reason is that they are attached to ‘outcomes’ rather than ownership of the structures, to become the very forces that drive the system of karma – which satisfies all just laws.

As part of the Sri Lankan Parliament – Mr. Sampanthan has the DUTY to take his position of Opposition,  Equal to the Prime Minister. To my mind, Lord Krishna said to do our Duty for this reason. The position taken defines our duty relative to others in the structure. One cannot have duty through one system and claim ownership through another system. To claim Prescriptive Rights over Tamil Homelands, Tamils must renounce their positions in Common Sri Lanka. Until then they would not be able to endorse themselves as Tamils only.

The physical pathway was taken by the LTTE and other rebel groups. Had they been left to their own claims – to run independently - they would have been harmless. But they were given opposition through the political pathway. They were born due to educated Tamils reacting to ‘Sinhala only’. To remain at Political level they had to be limited to ‘Politics only’ – which means each one has her/his say for her/his own sake. But where one says ‘yes’ and the other says ‘no’ – they form each other’s other side. That is what Sinhalese and Tamils have become at the political level. Where the two opposites are Equal in power – they form wholesome picture of ‘physical possession’ – of Sri Lanka in this instance. Where majority Sri Lankans are of this category we would continue to witness internal conflicts. This is the force that Mr. Sampanthan has contributed to.

Mr. Sampanthan then loses power to take the position of Equal Opposition to the Prime Minister in Sri Lankan Parliament – a job he got not on merit but due to those of us who truly completed our experience as Sri Lankans. I believe I am one – and I realized this when I upheld my Sri Lankan qualifications as my highest when challenged here in Australia by those in ‘White Only’ culture. I even went to prison in establishing that ‘ownership’. That is the higher, inclusive pathway to ownership which did not need me to be physically occupy North and East in Sri Lanka. But given that my Accounting ancestors were British – I was also attributing to wider world through Sri Lanka. That is the way of integration which is healthy for Australia. To me it was not about getting a good name from those above me in status. It was about MY AUSTRALIA – however tiny that space physically may be. By attributing credit to my professional ancestors – I invoked the absolute power of all true contributors to that heritage and also connected to the genuine current practitioners of that system. That is the way of the true believer.   

The very mind structure that Mr. Samapathan has developed through investments made though the system of Law – also have their origins outside Sri Lanka. If he does not need them – he must expressly and overtly renounce the positions earned through claims of investments in those systems and live exclusively in Trincomalee. By taking his position as leader of the opposition in Parliament – he is representing those ancestral powers that helped us promote ourselves to leadership positions in Common Sri Lanka – especially during British rule.

I have learnt through my own experiences that when we are true to ourselves the shortage in Space / Bodies is more than compensated by the expansion of Time. One who is attached to the physical would have difficulty in moving to the less physical relativity of the time system. Hence the downfall of the Sinhalese in Parliament despite their majority power as a race. That is the ‘built-in’ judgment power. The more Mr. Sampanthan promotes ‘attachment’ to Tamil areas but without Belief – the more isolated Tamils who follow him would become. Leaders in free environments infect those who abuse Independence towards premature ‘freedom’.

To become eligible to Independently govern themselves, Tamils have to first follow the laws of the Common system through which they make the claim. When they go beyond that system and uphold their independence – they need to be seen to be Above that system and not part of the very system they are claiming to be independent of. Truth is the only power that drives that highest system of all. Mr. Samapanthan needed to play the role of Governor in a Political environment and needed to help the folks of Vattukottai see themselves.  

The system of Truth answers to the call of every believer. Hence the power of One. Power of minority also is raised to Equal level due to one being true to oneself. Tamils have to be true to themselves to have the support of  the system of Natural Justice and not reduce their claim to smaller areas to ‘show’ power. As leader of the Opposition in the Common Parliament of Sri Lanka – Mr. Sampanthan ought to now focus on getting the wording for an Article Adverse to Article 9 which places Buddhism as the foremost religion. The wording needs to be to the effect that:

 ‘those who follow  Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, Muslim religions need to be facilitated to follow their own religious pathways to uphold Dharma.’

Then there needs to be a Legislation parallel to that of Prescriptive Ordinance. This Legislation needs to state words to the effect:

‘when a person/group who by longstanding practice (time to be specified) of a religious law claims right to self-determination  through such law – Independent of the Common system – such right shall be recognized as being Equal in status to that  of the status rendered by Common Law’

For the rest – Mr. Sampanthan needs to use his Position and practice Adversity at Equal level to the Prime Minister - to confirm Diversity – not just by Tamils but by all minorities in Common. That duty must first be satisfied to earn the eligibility to contribute to Constitution making/amending.

Ownership makes its own calls and Sri Lanka made that one on me  again today to educate Tamil leaders. The kids from schools around that area where Mr. Sampanthan spoke – come eagerly to our Coffee-Shop to buy toys and books – mostly used toys and books and also to enjoy the cake, jelly and pop-corn. At that moment – I forget the ‘costs’ to us but sell the goods at a price affordable by the students. That is the business parallel of ‘Adverse to’ Opposition. The joy of the students then is shared by me and I am never too tired to make the cakes, the jelly, the pop-corn nor to clean the place to reflect Australian standards of hygiene. Had Mr. Sampanthan likewise forgotten the ‘cost’ of his national status – he would have enjoyed the experience of  social sharing with Our Vattukottai whose mind has accommodated Coogee (NSW Australia)  values, leave alone Colombo values. We need leaders who have the ability to develop Common Values and not lead us to further isolation. The price paid by Vattukottai for accommodating the Vaddukkoddai Resolution in 1976 is this isolation. Ask any educated leader of 1976 Vaddukoddai to measure today’s Vaddukoddai and the above would be confirmed. Most members of the Diaspora of Vattukottai origin have abandoned Vattukottai except to claim credit in their new social circles. Some  come there, get some credit by spending money – largely in Temple buildings and structures – and take that credit back to their new social circles. Poor Vattukottai!

Mr. Lal Wijenayake

Chairman

Public Representations Committee on Constitutional Reform

constitutionalreforms@gmail.com

Dear Mr. Wijenayake,

Report on Public  Representations on  Constitutional  Reform

I seek to make my contributions to the Constitutional Reform Process through analysis of  some main points highlighted in your above report.  My responses are in red.

“Our sittings were held in public and all those who appeared before us were allowed to express their views freely and openly. On a study of the representations made by the people it is seen that a considerable representation of people throughout Sri Lanka are for:

1. Democratisation of the State, by establishing the Rule of Law, broadening

Fundamental Human Rights through a comprehensive Bill of Rights and

strengthening independent commissions.”

Democracy is the lateral system through which Experience rules above Theory. Law needs to have its source in local experience.

2. “Democratisation of the polity by strengthening institutions for people's active

participation in governance and political life by devolving power to the provincial

and local government level and by incorporating citizens' political activity at the

village or town level into the State structure.”

Without the above mentioned Experience base,  Devolution means a different way of interpreting the law/rule to suit the local authority.  It is not Democracy. As per the system of Democracy, the real Constitution ought to have already been produced by the People through their conduct. Hence the voting system.

The closest parallel  that comes to mind in relation to Sri Lanka,  is Prescriptive Rights – which is belief based. As per the laws of Sri Lanka, Prescriptive Rights to be entitled to become official legal titles, need to be Adverse to and Independent of  the Legal Title. Likewise, the Experience of the People – to become Law  - needs to be Adverse to and Independent of the Custodians of Power through the official path.  It should not be a different set of laws based largely on external knowledge.

“The current exercise of drafting a Constitution faces an unprecedented

challenge to create an atmosphere for peace, harmony and inclusiveness among all

communities. Therefore, the Constitution should encompass issues of democracy, law

and order, transparency, accountability, human rights and freedom, social justice,

equality, environmental and protection of natural resources.”

The need to recognize Diversity arose due to Cultural differences in interpreting the law  and/or Public outcomes. The Experience of the People when given form at Community level would confirm the  same  Destination  -  as those who  followed  the Common Law  covering all communities.  In marriage for example – if the final Destination is Love, and one uses the official laws and policies – towards this Destination, one feels supported by all others genuinely  using that pathway, provided one invests in that system in good faith.  But that Destination of Love could also be reached without any marriage laws but through common understanding between the parties eventually leading to common Belief that they are One. Citizens could likewise – use top-down laws to realize self-governance / independence or use the informal bottom-up cultural pathways to realize self-governance. In both instances the official system needs to cover larger group than the unofficial system to prevent Natural Separation due to quicker travel to the Destination. Once the Destination is reached – the boundaries of that pathway and the community are Natural. So long as they stay within those boundaries they cannot be ruled by any other law, because there is no law greater than the pathway of Truth. Once a person looks to benefits and rulings outside that local circle – the protection of this Absolute value is lost.  Hence Buddhists who use Buddha Sasana lose the authority to use Common Secular Laws applicable to all Sri Lankans.

The Destination is One but the Experience is had through diverse pathways.  There are elements of theory in Common Law – which may never be directly practiced / realized by various parts of the Community.  But through the official pathway – minds come together and/or relate to each other  on the basis of Common Principle – and help us widen our world.  But if this does not  happen faster than through the pathway of the citizen practicing through her/his culture to realize completeness in her/his local area – i.e. – at community level – then such Common Laws become burdens on society.

Equal Opportunity to take the religious path to becoming Sri Lankan  has been provided for by Article 9 of the existing Constitution. But this ‘freedom’ is upheld, only when those who follow the religious pathway consider other religious groups as Equals and not tell them from above. In other words, where there is no common belief – by either party – they must be separated and treat each other as Equals until known / proven otherwise.

Towards this Article 9 needs to be amended to remove preferential authority. Articles 9, 10 & 14 (1) (e)  state:

Buddhism.

9. The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e).

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

10. Every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

14. (1) Every citizen is entitled to -

 (e) the freedom, either by himself or in association with others, and either in public or in private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice or teaching;

The State  - to be Common,  needs to be bound by higher common principles than any particular religion practiced in Sri Lanka.  Where any particular religious law  is  accepted as State law – it places a ceiling for that group at that level. Hence a Buddhist does not have rights over a Hindu, Christian or Muslim.  Hence Article 9 needs to be  worded – to the effect that Buddhists do not have the right to take authority over any member of any other religion.  In other words, due religion being included in the Constitution Sri Lanka is either a Buddhist State or naturally divides and separates / privatizes on the basis of religion – to the extent citizens realize self-governance through the religious pathway rather than the secular pathway.

In  many ways  minority religious communities that do practice alternate pathway to Buddhism have developed ‘Prescriptive Rights’ to the extent they have remained independent of the Government.  To the extent they do not participate in giving foremost place to Buddhism – but  give foremost place to their own religion  - they have taken the alternate pathway through their Belief.  Given that realizing God is the destination – and they did not need nor could not have promoted Buddhism as the foremost religion – they are as right as the Government promoting Buddhism as the foremost religion. This then ‘separates’ them as Equals.  

Truth is the source of Belief and Truth being of Absolute value, cannot be made relative through human laws that provide the pathway to that Absolute value. The destination is Absolute and the milestone of foremost value is relative. The two do not belong as Equals.

The Report on Public  Representations on Constitutional Reform states:

4.2 Recommendations

As a compromise, the Committee agreed to recommend the different formulations of

the members as alternative recommendations for the consideration of the

Constitutional Assembly:

i. Retain Article 9 (Chapter II) of the current Constitution with no change.

ii. Heading of Chapter II of the current Constitution should state ‘Religions’ and

not Buddhism and retain Article 9 as it is with no change.

iii. Reformulate Article 9 of the current Constitution as follows:

 “The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give all religions equal status. The State shall

protect and foster Buddhism and the Buddha Sāsana while assuring to all

religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1) e of the current

Constitution .

iv. Sri Lanka shall be a secular State.

v. Sri Lanka shall be a secular State while recognising the role of religion in the

spiritual development of people.

vi. Heading of Chapter II of the current Constitution should State ‘Religions’. The

clause should be revised as follows:

“The Republic of Sri Lanka will give all religions equal status”

All of the above are compromised versions of the existing provisions in the Constitution. None is based on Experience that minorities did take up Equal and Opposite position and that in the case of  Tamils/Hindus  – they became Equal Opposition in Parliament when the Government became weak and disorderly. Choosing one particular religion to be specially fostered works against Democracy which needs Equal footing at the starting point. When Government is formed through majority vote – it naturally removes all other bases – including religion.   Article 9 therefore overrides the system of Democracy and empowers the  official to use ‘Buddhist authority’   instead of ‘objectively measurable outcomes’ produced independently  and adverse to the secular system of Democracy.

Where one uses Authority but does not feel  that the other is part of her/himself – and the other who is also a child of God – feels that her/his dignity is being damaged – the latter has the power to return the damage at the level  of ownership s/he feels.  Hence when a Hindu, Christian or Muslim feels s/he is Sri Lankan but is ‘told’ by a Buddhist that s/he comes after her/him – the Buddhist – who shows s/he is a Buddhist including through her/his attire – such Buddhist invokes the power of the Absolute to manifest at the level the non-Buddhist has truly contributed to in becoming Sri Lankan and openly upholding her/his status at that level. If this is through the secular pathway – the Natural Energies  of all those who invested to feel ownership in the system of Democracy – would Naturally support that person through the Spiritual Pathway of Truth. That is the way the Lord’s system works.

The Law of Nature is the path of  Truth and hence Truth is the base and the destination of all  logical human laws.  When a person manifests her/his Truth – it cannot be overridden by any human law.  That Truth could be used as ‘fact’ to relate between parties but not overridden by unpracticed theory and the authority based on theory. The provisions in the Constitution are theory. People’s contribution to  Constitution  needs to be experience based.

The example that comes to mind is in relation to a Testamentary case of a Vaddukoddai   Resident’s interstate estate.  The elder sister claimed that she had taken care of her siblings including the Deceased from the age of 10 - after their mother died.  This lady may believe that she was the mother and hence had the right to exclusively inherit  the Estate of her brother – just as her mother would have if she had lived.   If she did believe that to be the case – she would not compromise and uphold her belief  irrespective of whether she would win in a Court of Law which  has the Duty to apply Rights based common ruling irrespective of actual performance .  The sister ofcourse  could stay away from those within the family who refuse to  allocate her share on the basis of actual performance – based on her assessment as to what the duties of a mother are.  But her claim has no validity in Court.  Likewise any religion based ruling needs to stay within the boundaries and cannot be extended to the wider official system answerable to all citizens. If Buddha Sasana is the highest law of the country – then this country is not democratic.  To apply majority rule, one needs to start from zero advantage/equal footing.

There is nothing wrong in being a Buddhist State so long as one is Transparent about it and does not claim benefits on the basis of being Democratic.

Finally – from a legal angle I recently submitted that an Order is interlocutory and not final judgment if the matter was not raised to the highest possible level to construct the matter as widely as possible. Below is an excerpt:

(a) In S. RajendranChettiar& Others Vs S. Narayanan Chettiar   S.C.Appeal No. 101^A / 2009,  escalated from  the  District Court case No. 428/T in the District Court of Colombo in relation to the  Trustees of the Hindu Temple known as “Sri Kathirvelayuthan Swami Kovil”,   Dr.Shirani A. Bandaranayake, J includes in her Honor’s reasoning the following:

[Therefore to ascertain the nature of the decision made by a civil Court as to whether it is final or not, in keeping with the provisions of section 754(5) of the Civil Procedure Code, it would be necessary to follow the test defined by Lord Esher MR in Standard  Discount Co. v La Grange (supra) and as stated in Salaman v Warner (supra) which reads as follows:

“The question must depend on what would be the result of the decision of the Divisional Court, assuming it to be given in favour of either of the parties. If their decision, whichever way it is given, will, if it stands, finally dispose of the matter in dispute, I think that for the purposes of these rules it is final. On the other hand, if their decision, if given in one way, will finally dispose of the matter in dispute, but, if given in the other, will allow the action to go on, then I think it is not final, but interlocutory.”

 In Salaman v Warner (supra), Fry, L.J., also had expressed his views regarding an appropriate interpretation that had to be given to final and interlocutory decisions. Considering the difficulties that had been raised regarding the correct interpretation for final and interlocutory orders, it was stated that the attention must be given to the object of the distinction drawn in 15 the rules between interlocutory and final orders on the basis of the time for appealing. Fry, L.J. had accordingly stated thus:

“I think that the true definition is this. I conceive that an order is “final” only where it is made upon an application or other proceeding which must, whether such application or other proceeding fail or succeed, determine the action. Conversely I think that an order is “interlocutory” where it cannot be affirmed that in either event the action will be determined.”

Using the above ruling to your report – this is very much ‘interlocutory’ due to the Experience of the citizen having been higher than the level at which you have drawn the picture. Hence wars will continue to happen due to Natural forces that separate.

Yours sincerely

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam – 29 May    2016

Sri Lankan Muslims in Public  Administration

Here in Vaddukoddai, in Northern Sri Lanka, I said to a student in Management studies – that to live harmoniously, we must use our Truth where we are ‘free’ of position responsibilities or consciously use Common Principles, Laws and Values to relate to each other.

As highlighted by Professor Laksiri Fernando – whom I got to know through the Sri Lanka Reconciliation Forum, Sydney – the recent incident in Eastern Sri Lanka has surfaced racial tensions. Professor Laksiri Fernando states through his Colombo Telegraph article ‘Sampur Incident & Tensions In Devolution’:

[There are several issues related to the devolution of power to the provinces lurking behind the Sampur event where the Chief Minister (CM) of the Eastern Province (EP), Nazeer Ahamed, abused and insulted a senior naval officer, Captain I. R. Premaratne, at a school event where small children were present in addition to the US Ambassador. The behaviour typical of many politicians in recent past or even today should be condemned without hesitation.]

To my mind, we the People have to make decisions about how to bring these demonstrated Governance values – be they positive or negative – into our lives. Where we do not have position responsibilities – we are free to use our Truth and bring that person into ourselves as strengthening our side or showing the ‘other-side’ as Opposition. Truth allows only that kind of ‘inclusion’. Where we use relativity – we need Common Principles, Laws and Values to position ourselves viz a viz the other person. A child’s school behavior  is likely to be different to her/his  home behavior due to the child being more in her/his Truth at home and conscious regulated behavior in school. Likewise where leaders are strongly in their ‘home-culture’ – they are likely to override that True behavior in public also.

Professor Laksiri highlights:

[there are two other issues more profound in my opinion than what appears to be the case. First is about the way the CM has apparently been treated at the said event without being invited to the stage by the compere. It is said that it was the Governor who gestured him to come on board and when he was approaching the stage he was stopped by the naval officer probably to give way for the small children. Could it be a mistake or misunderstanding? I really doubt. As The Island editorial (26 May 2016) rightly said, while condemning the behaviour of the CM, “The CM should be treated with due respect and if any official has been remiss in his duties action is called for against him.”]

The million dollar question is - what are the duties of the officials and the leaders concerned? The parallel that comes to mind is the University system in Australia which I got to know through the University of NSW. The Chancellor is the parallel of the Governor and the Vice Chancellor is the parallel of the Chief Minister. Given that Professor Laksiri has been part of the Official system of the University he is more like the Vice Chancellor’s group than the Chancellor’s group. Duty to the Environment therefore prevails above  personal Truth. To this day, Professor Laksiri Fernando has not ‘understood’ that I was acting as per my Truth at the University of NSW. As per the responses from Professor  Laksiri Fernando I concluded that he grouped me as one of the ‘unfortunate lot’.

When something happens we can choose to bring that into us as part of ourselves and make the experience our Truth or relate to it through Common Principles and Laws. The Governor calling the Chief Minister to the stage was based on Truth – the same way my complaints were identified with by Chancellor Sir Anthony Mason followed by Chancellor Dr. Yu. But I learnt that their powers  stopped there. The reality was cover-up of the Central Administration’s weaknesses by the Vice Chancellors.

In the Sampur incident, as the Common guest – the Chief Minister could have taken his position as the ordinary citizen’s person – as I often do when Professor Laksiri Fernando is appointed to and/or facilitated to take the ‘telling’ position at the Sri Lanka Reconciliation Forum – Sydney. Officially as per my way of respecting the Structure - I then take the ‘listening’ position. But where the ‘telling’ goes beyond the institutional positions and their relationship – treat the ‘teller’ as a Common outsider. I have done this many times with Professor Laksiri Fernando himself. The strongest memory is that of Projects where Professor Laksiri Fernando who is part of the Academic Program – tried to override my contribution. This resulted in the persons who were ‘official listeners’ but were usually deaf to the ‘teller’ asking me during meal breaks to explain my contribution.

Professor Laksiri Fernando has demonstrated this ‘telling-tendency’ as follows:

[The CM has apparently regretted his behaviour according to the SLMC leader, Rauff Hakeem (The Island, 26 May 2016), but in any decent democracy this is a matter that any responsible politician or political officeholder should have resigned on. Unfortunately we don’t have that responsible tradition in Sri Lanka. In addition to any ‘disciplinary’ inquiry conducted on the matter by the President or the government, the aggrieved naval officer has every right to claim damages from Nazeer Ahamed, and he may be liable not as the CM but in his personal capacity. Otherwise, the tax payers’ money would be wasted.]

Wrong Professor Fernando, wrong due to LBW rule! The Chief Minister as per his position is the highest Administrator of that area. Confirming that structure is the duty of every Government Official including the Naval Officers in that area. Navy is the Leg and the Central Administration responsible for the Naval  Officer is the Wicket. The Naval Officer has authority to take the position of a private donor – in the event/project described  as follows by Professor Laksiri Fernando:

[It is said that the event was organized by the Navy to declare open a computer unit and a science lab at the Sampur Mahavidyalayam to the benefit of the students. This is commendable. On the Navy initiative, they were the donations of the David Pieris Group and the incident has happened when some school bags were being distributed to the students on the stage.]

In the Sri Lankan Public Administration – the Navy has the duty to guard our coastline and not to organize public events outside their boundaries. The could attend and be part of the Guards protecting the public – but not directly participate in Educational activities which are the responsibility of another part of the Administration – in this instance the one that comes closest is the Chief Minister through his Common Consolidated portfolio. It is NOT the Governor who has to connect through his Truth and provide policy feedback to the Central Government.

When I watched on TV that night - the expressions of the Chief Minister – I was unhappy. But I have learnt to appreciate that the Truth is more important than shows of  harmony especially in war affected areas. So long as we have enough ‘sophistication’ to include that unpleasant Truth in our own pleasant Truth – we are still progressive as One unit. The weaker parallels of that behavior have been demonstrated by many leaders in the Sri Lankan Diaspora in Australia – including by Professor Laksiri Fernando at the Sri Lanka Reconciliation Forum, Sydney. Anything more pleasant-looking would be frivolous if not covered by Common Principles of the official structure. We need to  bow to that Truth where it is manifested through the Elected Head of that area.

Truth above the Official level – becomes positive Energy.  Truth outside the Official boundaries – manifested at lower levels – especially emotional levels through hearsay  – becomes negative Energy. Sampur is a reservoir of such negative Energy due to the deaths and suffering of civilians in the hands of those who did not have the authority of Truth nor the blessings of the Official system and its laws. Interestingly – Water  the Natural element is part of the reason for this negative Energy in that area including through the Battle of Sampur. One may choose to not recognize Truth to do one’s duty. But where Truth is recognized to avoid duty – the manifestations confirm continued existence of animosity which the current Government has failed to diffuse or absorb.

Most Muslims known to me are driven by their Truth than by their position duty in a multicultural area. One needs to expect this and use their positions as facilities and not ‘take-over’ to run the show as if Sampur was a Naval base. Taking over is an invitation to react at the emotional level and the result would be the Middle-East also coming to Sri Lanka the way India came through Tamil Nadu.