-
Rulers failed to address plight of Northern people: U’grad activists
The recent demolition of the Mullivaikkal monument (also known as the war victim’s memorial) – erected within the premises of the University of Jaffna in 2019 in memory of the people who were victims of the three-decade long war between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the Government-led defence forces –sparked widespread controversy last week and raised a multitude of concerns regarding Sri Lanka’s approach to achieving long-lasting and meaningful reconciliation between people of diverse ethnicities, cultures, and religions, especially the Tamil and Sinhala communities. Even though the authorities decided to rebuild a new monument following protests launched by the students of the University of Jaffna and various activists, it begs the question as to whether the damage caused by the above move can be reversed in full by merely reconstructing the monument.
It would not be an exaggeration to state that even though the war came to an end 11 years ago, Sri Lanka is still struggling to build and strengthen inter-ethnic harmony between Sri Lankans of different ethnicities, and this is a clear sign that the war not only caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Sri Lankans and the destruction of properties, but also severely damaged Sri Lankans in general and begot a long-lasting war of ideologies, which also needs to be dealt with diplomatically. It should also be noted that dealing with ideological wars and damaged inter-ethnic harmony is a far more sensitive and complex matter, and requires putting ourselves in our fellow Sri Lankans’ shoes. It is high time that we come to terms with the fact that even though the physical war broke out in 1983 and ended in 2009, the ideologies and people’s experiences that gave birth to the war emerged before 1983 and are still alive to a certain extent, and that Sri Lanka still has not been able to fully address the bitter consequences of the war. The demolition of the monument at the Jaffna University premises – which, according to those who protested against the demolition, took place with no prior notification or warning – was claimed by many to be an arbitrary and oppressive act. This incident also attracted the international community’s attention, and protests were held in Tamil Nadu, India, and Toronto, Canada, opposing the demolition of the said monument.
Speaking to The Morning, the Inter University Students’ Federation (IUSF), the foremost student-led body addressing matters pertaining to universities in Sri Lanka, expressed concerns about the people’s democratic right to memorialise their war dead, irrespective of how they died or the movements they were involved in.
One of the arguments that was brought forward to justify the demolition of the monument at the Jaffna University premises was that it was constructed within the premises of the University of Jaffna, which is a state-owned, state-run institution, and that individually motivated monuments cannot be constructed within such premises. Responding to this claim, IUSF Convener Ven. Rathkarawwa Jinarathana Thera said: “Not only Tamil people; an astronomical number of people lost their close ones due to the war. People of the South hold commemorations, build monuments, and speak for their loved ones freely. It is the people’s democratic right. Irrespective of how a person died, they have as much right to hold remembrance events as anyone else. Reconstructing the monument at the University of Jaffna will not cause significant change, as the authorities have already given them a wrong message, and they are still oppressed. Many claim that this monument was an unauthorised one; but why didn’t anyone raise their voice against it to date?”
On 9 January, University Grants Commission (UGC) Chairman Professor Sampath Amaratunge stated that the decision to remove the monument at the Jaffna University premises had been taken by the Vice Chancellor of the University of Jaffna, Prof. Sivakolundu Srisatkunarajah. However, it was later reported that the university’s Vice Chancellor did not act of his own accord, and that the monument was demolished as per a classified directive he had received. The UGC Chairman had further stated that the existence of the monument would have been a threat to the unity between the North and South, and reconciliation.
The IUSF Convener added: “There are reasons that led to the three-decade war Sri Lanka had to deal with, and there is a history to what happened in Jaffna. These issues initially surfaced in the 1970s and 1980s and maybe even earlier. The Sinhala-Tamil separatism first began politically, both in the North and the South, and gradually morphed into a war. The root cause was the oppression faced by the Tamil people. There were armed conflicts in the South as well; however, the North-South conflicts escalated into an armed war which was difficult to manage. All these conflicts were predetermined and the rulers were responsible. The destruction of the Jaffna University monument was a clear violation of the citizens’ right to commemorate the dead.”
Sri Lanka’s recent history bears witness to the fact that most of the remembrance events held in the North and the East were labelled as pro-LTTE events organised to support separatist and extremist ideologies spread by the LTTE. Certain social media posts published following the demolition of the said monument, said that the demolished monument had also been constructed in remembrance of the LTTE, not civilians who died due to the war. Countering this argument, the IUSF said that what organisation or group a person belongs to does not matter when it comes to remembering them after their death, and that their political backgrounds and beliefs should be addressed separately.
Speaking of the events held by people of the North in remembrance of the Tamil people who died as a result of the war, the IUSF Convener monk added that depriving people, i.e. the people of the North, of their right to memorialise their own people, happened during the past few years in various ways, and that it is continuing.
The monk noted: “The discussion on whether they support the LTTE or LTTE members or their Leader is another matter, and needs to be discussed in depth. Those who organise remembrance events may consider LTTE members to be heroes, and we, the people of the South, may not concur with it. These ideologies are what need to be addressed, and we will not be able to prevent the outbreak of another war until and unless we realise that depriving people of their rights is not the correct way to deal with this situation. The people of the North and the people of the South have one struggle, and that is to defeat the racism, extremism, and separatism spread by the rulers on both sides. Supporting the LTTE and remembering one’s friends and relatives are two different matters. When it comes to addressing the continuing ethnic issue, we must accept that everyone has a democratic tight to memorialise their friends and relatives, irrespective of the reason they died or the organisations and groups they were a part of.”
Article 14 of the Constitution which guarantees, among others, the freedom of speech, assembly, association, occupation, and movement, states that every citizen is entitled to, the freedom by himself or in association with others to enjoy and promote his own culture and to use his own language, and 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, and teaching. People of the North, too, are entitled to these constitutional rights as citizens, and destroying things they value highly is not only a violation of the above rights, but also a message that their rights can be taken away unfairly if the authorities decide to do so.
Following the above incident, activists from various backgrounds expressed fear that the demolition of the Mullivaikkal monument at the Jaffna University premises as well as various recent decisions that directly or indirectly affect ethnic minorities, such as cremating the bodies of the Covid-19 dead, is a sign that the Government is in the process of systematically ostracising the country’s ethnic minorities. These activists, who, on social media platforms, expressed opposition to the way the monument at the Jaffna University premises was removed, also claim that that this is neither the first nor the only occasion that remembering the Tamil people who died due to the war was obstructed, and that it may not be the last. In fact, there are plenty of examples from around the world to suggest that the systematic removal of monuments, publications, and things of cultural and religious value has caused significant damage to people of diverse identities in the long run.
The IUSF Convener added that North and South-based politicians and political parties that ruled Sri Lanka after the end of the war have miserably failed to address the underlying reasons that led to the war and shortcomings in the implementation of the existing reconciliation process, and that ethnic rifts between the Sinhala and Tamil communities, therefore, appear to be remain unaddressed, although 11 years have passed since the end of the war. He further claimed that the demolition of the monument at the Jaffna University premises is a clear sign that the present Government has a racist agenda which involves oppressing minority ethnicities, and that this incident is likely to further exacerbate ethnic rifts. “The overall ethnic issue, which has been perpetuating for many years, was something orchestrated by North and South-based politicians, in a bid to attain narrow political objectives using racism and by dividing the people. This division ended up violating the people’s right to remember their own people, and the demolition of the monument at the Jaffna University premises was merely one such incident,” the IUSF Convener added.
There is also a serious lack of communication between the people of the North and the South, and decision-makers. People’s needs, problems, and values not being communicated properly is in fact one of the reasons why people on both sides do not respect each other. One can say that the recent spate of events concerning the demolition of the monument at the Jaffna University premises gives us a very specific message – that is that issues faced by people of the North should be discussed with none other than the people of the North, and that this is the easiest and most effective way their problems can be addressed. However, for some unknown reason, it seems to have been ruled out by those who make decisions. Had third parties that claim to speak for the people of the North, especially North-based politicians, done their job properly for the betterment of the people they represent, most of the issues, of which the root cause is misunderstandings and misconceptions, would not have arisen.
Sri Lanka, as a country that has gained a name for being a tolerant and compassionate nation, is now being accused of implementing systematic ostracism and oppression against ethnic minorities, especially the Tamil people. Not only does this situation raise concerns about Sri Lanka’s reconciliation process, it also begs a question as to whether we have come to a point where we deprive our fellow Sri Lankans of their right to memorialise their friends and relatives. We cannot rule out another’s values, culture, beliefs, and practices merely because it does not resonate with our own beliefs; nor can we take decisions on behalf of them unless and until we understand their plight and needs. Perhaps this is one of the things that is found to be lacking in Sri Lanka’s reconciliation process – they seem to believe in a one-size-fits-all-type of decision-making process. Forcing people to refrain from speaking about the ideologies that lie behind such activities and/or memorialising figures they look up to, will only result in further encouraging them to follow such ideologies blindly. Instead, the responsible authorities should give them the opportunity to enjoy their democratic rights, and thereby prove that separatism was never the answer.