Tuesday, 16 July 2013

Do Western Delegations to Sri Lanka come to see progress and development after terrorism, or confirm their prejudices against Sri Lanka ?

It was announced that an European Union Parliamentary delegation led by Jean Lambert has arrived in  Sri Lanka on an Official visit.   It will meet with the Government, the opposition and other groups during their stay which is due to last one week.  Jean Lambert is the Chairperson of the EU Delegation for Relations with the Countries of South Asia.

She is the woman who stated that she is concerned about reports of threats and attacks on human rights defenders and journalists in Sri Lanka and encourages the authorities to hold those responsible for accountability.  Therefore one can be sure that the EU Delegation will not make any objective observations after  their visit. 

These are people who take it for granted , being “White Europeans” ,that they know every thing happening in South Asia  and have the solutions for the problems. They come already prejudiced that the Government is accountable for all problems with regard to the Tamils of Sri Lanka. 

They will officially listen to the government , but their more important concern will be what the Tamil people will have to say against the government to confirm their own views and  “concerns with  the governments violation of human rights and violation of free media”.  At the end  of their visit they may say they are satisfied  with the progress that has been made,  but , “there is more to be done “

These delegations even before they come know exactly what they are going to say.  Therefore Sri Lanka need not be overly exited by  the visits of these delegations.  They will not after seeing the extensive development projects that have been carried out by the Government after the end of terrorism, and the government’s  remarkable progress in  the development  of  the living conditions of  the people in the North and East from what it had been before, make any positive remarks. 

There is of course  more to be done but what has been done just after four years of  destructive terrorism is singular.  But these visiting delegates are unable to  look at the situation from that point of view and make a statement to encourage the government and the people. 

They will harp on “human rights” and ask for "accountability".  These are their catch phrases.

On the 11 July,2013 there was a Televison Programme  in France 2 of the French Television , “ Carnet de Voyage d’Envoyer special.”  It was  a report by a special reporter  on Tourism.  In the television Magazine announcing the Programme the caption was “ Sri Lanka: a paradise in troubled waters”. 

The introduction read, “ After thirty years of Civil War (they never use the word terrorism, and for them there are no terrorists in countries like ours, they are “ freedom fighters” or “ rebels”), Sri Lanka has become a destination very much sought after, but in the North of the Island, Tamil families have been stripped of their lands.”

The Special Reporter to  Sri Lanka had not bothered to  show to the television spectators the attractive scenic beauty of the land.  They showed a French family  of tourists in a poor village area searching for crocodiles.  There were quick shots of the South, but gave more time to a visit to a village of thatched huts of poor fisher men in the North along with a Tamil journalist from one of the Tamil Journals which they said is critical of the Government. 

The Journalist took the special reporter to buildings under construction and explained they were hotels being constructed by the Ministers of the Government. They showed a barbed wire fence and said it is a forbidden area where poorer Tamil people lived. The journalist acting as a guide to the Special Reporter said that the tourists are taken only to selected areas, as the Tamil people whose lands have been robbed by the government  to construct Hotels live in deplorable conditions in areas where the tourists are not allowed to go.

The French Special Reporter was taken to the buildings under construction.  The workers  doing the construction work, the Tamil Journalist said, were the soldiers.  He added speaking to the  Special Reporter that, as there is no war the Sinhala military men are out of work and they  now work in hotel construction to earn money. 

There were several building constructions and the Tamil Journalist said that they are all hotels owned by Ministers, being built on land “robbed” from the poor Tamil people.  He said that  25 000 people were made landless in the area.  The programme did not boost tourism but confined to a report of the Tamil people in the North, and how they are  being discriminated against by the Government. The presenter of the programme  said in conclusion , “ behind the beautiful Post Card showing the scenic beauty of Sri Lanka is the  blood and tears of the poor Tamil people  robbed of their lands and left destitute.”

The West is out to make Sri Lanka no better than a poor country in  Africa  where the  Government Ministers and officials  make money caring the least for the well being of the poor Tamil people.
That is what every Western visitor seems to say when they get back to their home countries after enjoying the hospitality of the people of Sri Lanka.  They seek out Journalists like those of the Udayan News Paper and “swallow” all they say as the Gospel truth.

Saturday, 13 July 2013

A presentation to the Select Committee of Parliament to Recommend and Report on Political and Constitutional Measures.

Mr.Neil Iddawala,

The Secretary to the Select Committee of Parliament to Recommend and Report on Political and Constitutional Measures to Empower the People of Sri Lanka to Live as One Nation
Parliament of Sri Lanka
Sri Jayawardenepura,

Dear Sir,

Reference to the request made by the Select Committee of Parliament on the 10th July, 2013, to make representations with regard to (i) preserve and promote their respective identity and live with dignity and security as one Nation, (ii) enhance the unity of the people of Sri Lanka, and (iii)  empower the people and the country to promote social, economic, political and cultural development,  I make the following presentation.

The 13 Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka should be completely and wholely removed for the following reasons.

The 13 th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka could be looked at  from two different points of view.

(i)              as a part of the Constitution of Sri Lanka, without taking into account how and when it was introduced in to the Constitution, and
(ii)            as a  requirement under the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord  signed in  July,1987, to  include it  in the Constitution of Sri Lanka as the 13th Amendment in return for India to disarm the Militant groups and the LTTE terrorists, and establish peace.

Hence,  under item (i)  there is no problem in keeping or  removing the 13th Amendment considering it only as an Amendment to the Constitution.  Sri Lanka had three Constitutions since its Independence.  The Present Constitution was promulgated in September,1978. It has 18 Amendments.  If the circumstances necessitate,  the Parliament  could remove the 13 Amendment  by a mere two third majority in the Parliament  or  seek a mandate from the people to  remove it.

All promulgations of a Constitutions,  or amendments to the Constitution of Sri Lanka could be carried out by the Parliament of Sri Lanka accept where it is necessary to  call for a referendum of the people.  No foreign country has the right to intervene and dictate in the preparation of a Constitution, promulgation or bringing in Amendments to it.

Under such circumstances what we do with the 13 Amendment to the Constitution is the business of Sri Lanka and not that of any other country in the world.  The Parliament could modify the 13 Amendment, or remove it completely from the Constitution according to the powers vested in it.

But under item (ii) referred to above, if the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka were to be considered a part of the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord, then the question arises  as to whether there is a legal and a valuable reason to leave the 13 Amendment  in the Constitution of Sri Lanka after March, 1990, when the last IPKF contingent left Sri Lanka having lost 1155 of its cadre and having failed to settle the on going terrorism or disarm the LTTE and the  different Tamil  Militant groups under the terms of  the India Sri Lanka Peace Accord- without  giving satisfaction to the  Peace Accord by India.

The deployment of an Indian Peace Keeping Force to disarm the LTTE and the different Tamil militant Groups and establish peace by  India, in return for Sri Lanka to enter the 13 Amendment  into the Constitution of Sri Lanka  and establish Provincial Councils were the requirements  under the Peace Accord entered into by Rajiv Gandhi and JR Jayawardhana  signing the India Sri Lanka Peace Accord on the 29 July,1987.

Unfortunately when India withdrew its IPKF having failed to satisfy the  Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord, Sri Lanka had already satisfied its part of the Peace Accord by introducing the 13 Amendment in to the Constitution and establishing Provincial Councils, believing that India would be able to disarm the LTTE and the Militant  Groups to end terrorism and establish peace.

However, Sri Lanka did the mistake of not making provisions in the Peace Accord to hold the insertion of the 13 Amendment into the Constitution of Sri Lanka until the IPKF showed to the satisfaction of Sri Lanka  that it was able to carry out its promise to disarm the LTTE and the Militant Groups and establish peace.  The result of that failure was that Sri Lanka satisfied its part of the Accord well before IPKF proved not only that it was incapable of disarming the LTTE, but also that the LTTE terrorists were a force far stronger than  it  expected.   

The end result was that the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord was breached by India without giving satisfaction to the Accord , with Sri Lanka  having an unwanted 13 Amendment  left in its Constitution.

Therefore the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord entered into by Rajiv Gandhi and JR Jayawardhana was revoked in March, 1990, by one party to the Peace Accord-namely India having failed to give satisfaction. Therefore the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord signed in July,1987 is a defunct instrument without any legal value, and logically the 13th Amendment which is an off shoot of that Accord is now an illegal instrument which has no place in the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

If in June,1987 India did not intervene by dropping relief food supplies to the terrorists held in siege   by the Sri Lanka Armed Forces, the terrorists would have been defeated  and terrorism in Sri Lanka would have been terminated in 1987.

But because of the Indian intervention the terrorism continued its  destructive presence for 22 long years.  Therefore, the Indian Government is responsible for all those loss of  lives, wounded soldiers and civilians ,  damages to material and the economic  cost of war during that period.  Sri Lanka Government therefore has a legal right to claim compensation from India. 

It is clear that Since 1987 India had acted in bad faith vis à vis Sri Lanka with an ulterior motive.  It is an open secret that India took an active role in the defence of terrorism in Sri Lanka. It was made evident when India sent  a convoy of unarmed ships in June, 1987 to Jaffna, followed by airdropping  relief supplies to terrorists in siege.

Sri Lanka should also not forget  that in NJune,1987, the Indian External Affairs Minister K.Natwar Singh had  summoned  the Sri Lanka High Commissioner in New Delhi to inform him of India’s decision to air drop relief supplies to the rebels(terrorists) and had  threatened that if the Indian Operation was hindered in any way India would launch a full force military retaliation against Sri Lanka.  It was after that Sri Lanka was forced to sign the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord on the 29 July, 1987.

Has India changed since then ?

But Sri Lanka had always acted in good faith despites India’s hidden motives.
India fooled Sri Lanka to accept the 13th  Amendment prepared by Indian legal Officers to facilitate the terrorist to  eventually establish a separate  Eelam State by strengthening their hold in the Provincial Council once established.  For that purpose North and the Eastern Provinces were merged into one under the so called Peace Accord.

Sri Lanka naively  included the 13th  Amendment into the Constitution in good faith in order to get the Indian Peace Keeping Force  to disarm the LTTE and the Tamil Militant Groups and  establish peace as India had agreed under the Peace Accord.  India however failed to keep its part of the agreement and abrogated it by pulling out the IPKF in 1990.

India cannot now  claim any legal right under the defunct Peace Accord to intervene to demand Sri Lanka to implement the 13th  Amendment.   The 13th  Amendment is an appendage that remain from an rescinded  accord and has no legal value.  The Sri Lanka Government need not  turn to India to have its consent to remove the unnecessary vulgar appendage-a symbol of shame, the 13th Amendment.

The government may get a legal opinion and remove it by a resolution in Parliament  failing which it may call for a referendum.

India has to stop its continued aggressive demands with regard to the 13th  Amendment as India has lost its right to make such demands as far back as in 1990,  and implementing or not implementing the 13th  Amendment is now a matter which has to be decided by Sri Lanka  alone, without India’s unnecessary interference.

However, Sri Lanka has the legal  right to  demand India to pay compensation for the breach of the Peace Accord through India’s failure to give satisfaction to the Accord, resulting in the loss of  human lives, disability to persons and damage to property caused from 1987 to 2009 through terrorism, plus the economic cost of the war  against terrorism to Sri Lanka which  is estimated  at USDollars 200 billion. 

The 13th  Amendment has no relevance to Sri Lanka in its present context, therefore it has no reason to remain as an  Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka. The Government of Sri Lanka is making considerable effort to reconcile the Communities eliminating even  the majority and minority concept of the people.  The Tamil people have to be made to accept themselves as a part of the Sri Lankan people and unite with the other Communities in a Unitary Sri Lanka.  That would not be possible under the Provincial Council System established under the 13th  Amendment which will only perpetuate separatism.

Sri Lanka should set up a system of Regional Administration in keeping with its own cultural and social background with a view to eliminate Communal Separatism.  Such a system of Administration should stretch  from village level to Government as the Centre.  In it  all Communities should be brought together preserving their respective identity and  assuring security from village level on wards.  Such a system will promote unity of the Communities that will be able to settle differences at village level. It will also pave the way  for the people of Sri Lanka as a whole  to promote and participate in  social, economic, political and inter cultural developments.

These positive developments will not be possible under the Provincial Council System which has created an  intermediate system of Administration which is akin to a Parliamentary System, distancing the Provincial Councillors from the ordinary mass of people , unable to integrate into the different social levels of the society because of a pseudo sense of a higher economic and social status. 

The 13th  Amendment should therefore be removed  completely from the Constitution of Sri Lanka, which would enhance the Independence of Sri Lanka as a Sovereign State without India claiming a right to intervene in view of a breached, and  now defunct Peace Accord to which  India was a party.

Therefore, it is my opinion that in the interest of our people  who should live in dignity and in security amoung  their fellow country men in peace and harmony,  the 13th  Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka should be removed  wholely and completely leaving no  trace of it by a  two third majority in Parliament,  or  by a referendum of the people.

In conclusion I would like to remind the Select Committee of the Parliament that the President since his election, without the support of the UNP and the rest of the Opposition, had determined and carried out under immense difficulties tasks that none other political leader of Sri Lanka had dared even attempted, and achieved success. 

Therefore, in the removal of the 13th Amendment from the Constitution too he need not depend  on the support of the UNP, the TNA and  other Political Parties which have only restricted self interests. The President should without hesitation do what has to be done in the interest of the people and the country as he has already proved he is capable of doing, and remove the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and face boldly any consequences for which he will have the support of the people. 

I pray for the President, the people and the Country the blessings of the Triple Gem

Yours Sincerely ,


Wednesday, 10 July 2013

Sending Basil Rajapakse to Indi has srirred up a Hornet’s Nest.

In 1987 India illegally  forced into the airspace of Sri Lanka and thereafter forced Sri Lanka to enter in to an Agreement or an Accord.  An agreement , or an Accord is no different to a contract between two parties, whether it is between two persons, two Companies, or two Counties.  It has to have essential basic requirements to bind the parties legally to the agreement.  It should be voluntary.  It should have  one or more legal  obligations to be performed by one party to the other.  If any of the obligations is not performed by either one of the parties there would be a breach of the agreement and it could be rescinded without any legal effect.

India was from the beginning sympathetic towards the terrorists. They were trained by India and release in Sri Lanka to allow the Terrorists to form a separate Eelam State. The Indian Government has not denied the fact, as it cannot do so as there are enough evidence of their close involvements with the terrorists of Sri Lanka. In June,1987 when the terrorists were sieged in Jaffna and were about to be eliminated by the  Operation Liberation of the Sri Lanka Armed Forces, India sent  a convoy of armed battle ships to North of Sri Lanka for “humanitarian Assistant”. The Sri Lanka Navy intercepted the Indian convoy of armed ships and forced it to turn back. 

India then decided to air drop of relief supplies to the terrorists besieged  in Jaffna, and the Indian Minister of External Affairs K.Natwar Singh summoned the Sri Lanka Ambassador in New Delhi to inform of the India’s decision to air drop relief supplies to the terrorists, and had threatened  if the Indian Operation was hindered in any way  that “India would launch a full-force military retaliation against Sri Lanka”.

It was after  that threat of the Indian  External Affairs Minister K.Natwar Singh the  militarily powerful India forced upon militarily powerless Sri Lanka to accept a Peace Accord on the understanding that  Sri Lanka would not proceed with its military offensive against  the terrorists.  The Accord was not among equally powerful parties and was not voluntary on the Part of Sri Lanka.

Now the Pact  entered into by JR Jayawardhana on behalf of Sri Lanka and Rajiv Gandhi on behalf Indian on the 29 July, 1987 was called Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord. It was an accord of necessity. 

However the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord was entered into on the acceptance by both parties, for India: (i) to resolve the on going terrorism, and (ii) to get the Tamil terrorists to surrender Arms and establish peace.
and  for Sri Lanka, (i)  to devolve power to the Provinces, and (ii) to withdraw its  troops to their barracks.

The Sri Lanka readily performed its part of the Accord by introducing the13Amendment prepared and demanded by India  to be included in the Constitution of Sri Lanka in terms of item (i) of its agreement under the Peace Accord to devolve power to the Provinces.  Sri Lanka also withdrew its armies to the Barracks under item (ii) of its agreement under the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord.

That means Sri Lanka had performed its obligations under the Indo Lanka Peace Accord.
Now for this Peace Accord to be legally binding India had to performs the two items it had agreed to perform under the Pact.

Now to make the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord legally binding on the two parties, India had to perform its part of the Agreement under the Peace accord to the satisfaction of Sri Lanka the second party to the Peace Accord, which was to (i) to resolve the on going terrorism.

Did India perform  its part of the Agreement ?

No India failed in both counts, (i) to resolve the on going terrorism or, (ii) to get the terrorists to surrender their Arms. The terrorists initially agreed to surrender their arms, but later  declared they will continue their struggle until they set up an independent Eelam State and refused to surrender Arms. 

In 1990 the Indian Army left with 1155 of its cadre lost,  without having performed either  part of their agreement under the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord, leaving Sri Lanka which had already performed its part of the Agreement, with the terrorists problem more aggravated after the Indian intervention with its Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord. And to make matters worse with a 13 Amendment which Sri Lanka had included post haste in to the Constitution in good faith.

In ordinary circumstances as it would happen in an ordinary contract the Party to the Agreement or Contract who fails to perform his part of the contract is legally bound to pay compensation to the other party,  who had in good faith performed his part of the contract.

But what is happening to-day with regard to the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord is not normal ?

India which is legally responsible for the breach of the Peace Accord still remains the  Party that is dictating terms to Sri Lanka, which was made to suffer not only materially but  with the deaths of tens of thousands of its youthful soldiers and  even more wounded, and large numbers of dead and wounded civilians.

But India which lost only 1155 of its soldiers cannot demand any thing from Sri Lanka, sighting the Indo Sri Lanka which had been legally rescinded by India itself as a Party to the Peace Accord having failed to perform its part of the Accord.

Now it is for Sri Lanka to demand India to pay compensation, and India to accept that the India-Sri Lanka Peace Accord  has failed and that Sri Lanka is not bound any more by the Peace Accord to  respect the inclusion of the 13Amendment forced into the Constitution of Sri  Lanka,  which Sri Lanka had  accepted to do in good faith, expecting India to honour its part of the Accord.

Sri Lanka political leadership now  behaves  like thieves who have been caught stealing some thing from India and indebted to it.

Sri Lanka has one thing to do , and that is to remove the 13Amendment without consulting or informing India as if Sri Lanka is a Vassal State of India.       

There was no necessity for Sri Lanka to have sent the Minister Basil Rajapakse to India to inform India of its proposal to hold the PSC with regard to removing certain parts of the 13Amerndment and requesting that the TNA be requested to be a part of the PSC.

The removal or keeping of the 13 Amendment is a matter for Sri Lanka.  The Indo Sri Lanka Pact through which the 13Amendment had been introduced  has been rescinded by India’s failure to abide by its  promise to perform its part of the Agreement.   India-Sri Lanka Peace Accord has no legal value any more, no  court would  deny it.

It is the Sri Lanka Government Leadership that is keeping the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord alive binding Sri Lanka to honour its pledge (which it had already done). It is India that has not honoured its pledge. 

It is time that the President Mahinda Rajapakse awakens to that fact and go ahead with the removal of the 13 Amendment and be bold to face consequences.   If  the President cannot get the 13 Amendment Removed by PSC or using his executive powers, he should then go to the people, to have the 13 Amendment removed by a referendum of the people.

The Minister Basisl Rajapakse, the emissary of the President who was sent to inform the Indian Minister of External Affairs Salman Khurshid and the  Indian National Security  Adviser Shiv Sankar Menon that  the Government of Sri Lanka is proposing small changes to the 13 Amendment, came back like a  kicked dog lapping his wounds  having achieved nothing and keeping mum about his visit.

Only thing  Basil Rajapakse’s visit to India has done is that Sri Lanka has made giants of not only Salman Kurshid and Shiv Sankar Menon, but also TNA which is now asking the Government of Sri Lanka  to confine the soldiers to their barracks.  And the Government of Sri Lanka seems to be acting as if it cannot to do any thing without the assent of TNA.

It is a shame that Sri Lanka is unable to assert its right to do what it thinks is the best by its country and by its people.  We are not at all indebted to India.  India had always been an enemy of Sri Lanka and will continue to be so.  It is only the President and his Government that seem to be assiduously licking the posterior of India. 

It was reported that the the President  Mahinda Rajapaksa had told visiting Indian National Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon, “……. that most of the points in the 13th Amendment will be implemented”.  And , “…that there were issues in the clause dealing with land and police powers to the provinces and that needs to be addressed by the Parliament Select Committee.”
The President had also requested Menon to “….Convince the TNA to join the Committee.”
Is it really necessary that  India be informed that only small things in the 13Amendment will be removed ?  
Why does not the President realise that we have nothing to ask  India about what we are doing with our constitution ? 
Does it really matter whether TNA joins the PSC or not ? 
It is a Parliamentary requirement that every member of the Parliament should respect the Parliamentary procedures, if any member fails to respect those democratic Parliamentary procedures they are in breach of the constitution and should be impeached.
Basil Rajapakse’s visit to India to inform the affairs of our country to the Indian Leader Ship has only stirred a hornet’s nest.  Only statement Basil Rajapakse had made since his return from India is that , “Some things can be said openly and some things cannot be said openly in diplomatic business between governments. They [India] gave us some of their views, we expressed our views. That is what usually happens .”
If that is any thing to go by, both the Government of Sri Lanka and that of India, share secrets of which the people are allowed only the right to guess hoping that such secrets are in their interest and that of the country.

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

Why have we got to inform every thing we do to India ?

Buddhist Monks Protesting against the 13 Amendment
 The Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse has rightly said , “Sri Lanka should not listen to India with regard to the implementation of the 13th Amendment as the national problem was inherently one that should be solved by Sri Lankans.” And added, “We should not listen to India on this; this doesn’t meant that we lose the relationship we have with India. But if there is a problem it should only be solved by Sri Lankans and not India,”

Perhaps as the big neighbour next door we should tell India what we are doing .  But India is not a friendly neighbour though we try to make it look like it is our best friend.  It was India’s manipulation into our internal affairs that has  allowed it to leave us with a sword of the Damocles. The time has come for us to remove it before it would fall on our heads.

How can we make India wise to look after it own business, when it is shivering with fear not wanting to invoke the wrath of a foolish woman  Jayalalitha of  Tamil Nadu.  The great India is dancing to the tune of  a politically inept Jayalalitha despite its claim to leadership in Asia.

In the meantime we have our own foolish politicians who vow to take revenge from Sri Lanka if the 13Amenment is removed.  

 How can one understand  Vasudeva Nanyakkara’s determination even to leave the Government if the 13 Amendment is removed ?  The only reasonable explanation is that he wants to please his son-in-law who is apparently a Tamil-the Judge Wigneswaran’s son. 

That  is the explanation that could be drawn from his subsequent  statement:
“We have taken an oath to accept the Constitution and although there may be diverse views regarding the 13th Amendment we have to accept it. It is the democratic right of the people to hold such views as the complete repealing of the 13th amendment or curtailing of its powers”

He is sitting between two chairs, not wanting to sit lest he would fall.  Vasudeva, or  Rajitha Senaratne  leaving the Government would be no great loss provided the government is able to  remove the  unwanted mole sticking out from the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

However, a wise advice to the government comes from an unlikely person , from an unlikely party.   
Ravi Karunanayake from the UNP had said:
 “If, the government is really committed as it says to diluting or scrapping devolution, do it now without looking for scapegoats and adopting time wasting exercises such as Parliamentary Select Committees. The ethnic conflict has been discussed for decades and all the issues and solutions have been identified. “

And how true is what Ravi Karunanayake says without mincing words: “The only thing left to do is implementation which is not forthcoming obviously due to the lack of guts in matching words with action.’’

When can we expect the Government to develop its guts strong enough to do what is necessary, when its pride in elimination of terrorism seems to be waning as time passes by. 

In the meantime the Government sends an emissary to India-Basil Rajapakse to meet Salman Kurshid the External Affairs Minister of India , and its National Security Advisor Shivasankar Menon, to  " ….brief them on the political situation including matters relating to the proposed amendments to the thirteenth amendment." 

Basil Rajapakse is unfortunately not meeting the correct people in India , he should have met Jayalalith instead as she is to-day the most politically important person in India, Manmohan Singh playing second fiddle to her.

Who have become the most vociferous people in Sri Lanka ro-day ? 

It is the MPs of the LTTE proxi Party TNA.  TNA MP Premachandran says, “The aim of the PSC is to dilute the powers of the 13A. We can't agree to that. We want 13 plus ”.   Sampathan the leader of the TNA has said, “….the attempt by the Government to weaken the 13th Amendment comes despite its continued commitment to India and the UN to implement the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in full, and go beyond and build upon it so as to achieve meaningful devolution.”

Sampanthan has added, that, “……. in the absence of any Opposition member of Parliament, this PSC will be nothing but a sub-committee of the Government Parliamentary Group and not a Parliamentary Select Committee and will have no credibility whatsoever,”

In that case only thing Sampanthan has to do  to make the PSC credible is to join it.  If he does not accept to participate in the PSC deliberations which is the most democratic thing to do, then he has to accept the decisions of the PSC taken in their absence.

In the mean time Rauf Hakeem who had been trusted  by the government to make him the Minister of Justice of Sri Lanka had said, “ The PSC must be put in the dust bin. There will be no main opposition, no TNA, no SLMC",  showing that he is the most unfit person to be a trusted Minster of Justice of Sri Lanka.   

As the Minister of Justice he should understand that PSC is a democratic Parliamentary procedure in keeping with the Constitution and it is the “duty” of every parliamentarian to respect it and join its deliberations, and more so Rauf Hakeem the Minister of Justice.

Sarath Fonseka whose party is to contest the three PC elections has said, “… amending the 13th Amendment to the Constitution at this juncture would disrupt the ethnic harmony in the country.”

It is not a correct evaluation of the 13Amendment. The  removal of the 13 Amendment  and  drawing  up a more representative system of regional administration will give a voice to ordinary Tamil People, who are now dominated by the high caste Tamil politicians who work for the separation of the Tamil people from the rest of the Communities. 

The 13 Amendment left as it is will give power not to the local Tamil people at the grass root level but to those English speaking Vellalas from the diaspora and proxi terrorist TNA MPs.

Perhaps it would have been more appropriate to go to the people and remove the 13Amendment by a referendum, instead of loosing  further time removing  clauses from here and there to water down the effect of the 13 Amendment. 

It is not a watered down 13 Amendment that is necessary for Sri Lanka but the complete removal of it.