Archive for April, 2008
by D.B.S. Jeyaraj
Orders going out to the 57 division in late march directed that the area in and around our Lady of the Rosary church in Marudhamadhu (Madhu) be taken by the traditional April new year.
There is optimism in military circles that the security forces may accomplish the mission as directed by the fixed deadline of Sinhala and Tamil new year.
The on going fighting to seize Madhu has seen the 57 division under Major – General Jagath Dias being engaged on three fronts. The triumphal entry into Madhu is likely to be made by the 57 – 2 brigade.
At present the 57 – 2 is entrenched in two fighting formations at Sinnapandivirichaan about two miles from Madhu church junction and Periyapandivirichaan about three miles from Madhu church.
The belief that the army would enter Madhu before mid – April is predicated on the basis that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) would withdraw completely from the area in a few days.
Already large numbers of tiger cadres are pulling out of their entrenched positions within Madhu church precincts and its environs including the jungles of Madhu sanctuary.
Earlier tiger cadres belonging to the Charles Anthony infantry division, Malathy womens brigade and Radha special operations corps had been active in the Madhu region.
The overall defences of Mannar district under which Madhu falls, has been supervised by “Col” Lakshman or Letchumanan who is the district military commander.
The Madhu defences were under the special military commander “Col” Jeyam who had earlier been deployed in the Kudumbimalai/Thoppigala area of the East.
Col Jeyam is a native of Pavatkulam and among other things has been special commander of Vavuniya district.
While there has been a gradual pull – out of cadres it is not clear whether there would be a total evacuation or whether a down – sized contingent would remain in the area engaging troops in combat.
It is also unclear whether the LTTE has removed the 122 mm artillery piece and the other 81 mm guns it had positioned in the area.
After the Catholic clergy and laity evacuated from the Churh premises the LTTE has moved into church precincts.
Though the tigers have kept away from the main church and compound they are now moving around within outer church precincts setting up new defences.
The only non – combatant inside churh premises is the Sinhala caretaker and his Tamil wife. This man who grew up in Madhu speaks Tamil fluently.
The first week of April saw an escalation of hostilities that resulted in shells falling inside a well, living quarters of priests and camping sites of pilgrims.
Both the LTTE and army denied responsibility and blamed each other for the shelling.
The increased danger to the church saw the remaining skeleton staff of clergy and laity leaving the Church on April 3rd. The Sacred statue of Mother Mary and baby Jesus was taken about 20 km to the north to Thevayanpitty.
The LTTE encouraged and facilitated this evacuation. Apart from the statue many other valuables and documents were also taken out.
The sacred statue was first taken to Palampitty and from there to the St. Xaviers church in Thevayanpitty. The LTTE provided safe escort.
After the statue was transported away safely LTTE media released pictures of damage caused by shelling to the Sacred Heart chapel situated on the left of the main church at Madhu.
This is the same church that sustained damage through shelling in November 1999.
The fact that the tigers aided and assisted the “displacement” of the sacred statue of “Madhumaathaa” to Thevayanpitty has strengthened expectations among security circles that a grand evacuation as in the eastern instances of Sampoor, Vaakarai, Paduvaankarai etc is on the cards.
The removal of statue and documents is seen as a forerunner to LTTE evacuation.
The security forces feel that the encircled LTTE has no choice other than to melt way from the area. The security forces are within close proximity to the Church on the South at Sinna and Periyapandivirichaan.
They have also blocked to a great extent the main access roads from different directions towards Madhu.
It is surmised that creeping strangulation is taking place and that the tigers have no option but to withdraw.
There are however other factors that militate against such an optimistic scenario.
In the first place it is highly unlikely that the LTTE would withdraw before April new year thereby giving the Rajapakse regime something to gloat about and engage in propaganda for “aluth Avuruddhu”.
Such an eventuality obviously would have a corresponding downside to the LTTE as “Sithiraip Puthaandu” (April new year) would be a day of disappointing sadness for the tigers.
It may be recalled that the LTTE fought fiercely to prevent army progress in Jaffna during “Operation Riviresa” in 1995 till the end of November. The idea was not to let the enemy triumph before Great Heroes day on Nov 27th.
Once that day passed the tigers began withdrawing and on Dec 5th 1995 the lion flag was raised at Durayappah Stadium.
Likewise there may be a “prestige” issue here too and thus potential evacuation may be postponed.
The other point is that contrary to defence circle expectations the LTTE has not been boxed in. Movement is restricted but not completely curtailed.
Until and unless Palampitty and Adampan fall the LTTE road transport to Madhu can continue . The route taken by catholic priests to transport the sacred statue can work for the tigers too.
The other route is through the jungles of Madhu sanctuary that extends to the north up to Panankaamam the seat of Wanni chieftain Pandara Vanniyan who fought the British in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
There is every possibility that notwithstanding Colombo’s expectations the LTTE will keep a viable unit of cadre in Madhu to engage the armed forces indefinitely.
Such an engagement would place the armed forces at a disadvantage if assertions by army circles of controlled firing so as to prevent harm befalling the church and environs is indeed true.
If that were true then the LTTE has only to strengthen its defences within church preincts and continue to stay put for a while. The security forces would be in a “heads you win tails I lose” situation.
If the security forces restrain themselves from engaging in artillery and mortar fire against church precincts the task of removing tigers from their entrenched positions would be virtually impossible.
If on the other hand the forces do fire at tiger positions regardless of whether they are within church precincts or not and if church buildings are damaged there would be negative publicity for Colombo.
The Government would face the censure of both the Vatican and the international catholic community.
There is also the danger that the LTTE may damage the Church and other chapels themselves if hard – pressed. The tigers would not want Colombo to capture the Church and precincts including the pilgrim campsites intact.
A motivating compulsion for the LTTE in fighting to retain Madhu is that of preventing a Colombo triumph over that area
There are political and military reasons for this.
In earlier articles about Madhu I had opined that Madhu was not of strategic military importance and that the causes of conflict were more political.
Conversations with knowledgeable sources have compelled a revision of my earlier opinion. I now find that militarily Madhu is of significant importance .
The military significance of Madhu is that the place is ideal for setting up a massive military complex under the pretext of protecting the church and pilgrims.
In post – independence Sri Lanka the army first moved into the North in the early fifties for the ostensible purposes of combatting illicit imigration and smuggling.
Then the Army had wanted to set up a camp at Nallathanniirakkam to protect Madhu but was politely declined by Bishop Emilianuspillai.
The idea of setting up a military camp near Madhu had lingered for long despite a base being set up in Thalladdy to control causeway movement to the Mannar Island.
The Rajapakse regime has begun militarising the Country in an unprecedented manner. The probability of setting up a major military complex at Madhu is very much there now.
Madhu with its tank and tubewells and campsite infra-structure provides an ideal venue for setting up a military camp at short notice.
Such a camp would be useful to retain a hold on Madhu church environs and also to use as a launching pad for further incursions into tiger controlled territory.
Already the armed forces are exploring the options of moving along the coastal Mannar – Pooneryn road and also move forward parallel to the A – 9 highway.
If Madhu is secured then the armed forces can also try out forward movement in the middle.
Securing the inter- linking roads from Iranaiiluppaikulam in the east to Pallamadhu in the west would help extend and consolidate army presence in the region. Madhu would be of pivotal importance in this configuration.
In addition to this military dimension there is the political significance. Giving impetus to political compulsions is the egoistic personality of President Rajapakse.
As stated in these columns earlier President Rajapakse is smarting under his being prevented from visiting Madhu prior to the presidential elections. His inability to visit all parts of the Country despite being premier is a sore point.
In December last year when prospects of securing Madhu loomed large there were media reports of Rajapakse telling cabinet ministers “Now I dont have to take permission from anyone to go to Madhu”.
Obviously Rajapakse has not forgiven the LTTE over Madhu and is very keen to capture the area.He would also like to ensure that Mdhu always remains under Colombo writ.
There is also rising resentment among many Sinhala catholics that they have been unable to undertake pilgrimage to Madhu for many, many years. They too would like to go to Madhu and army conquest of the area will faciliutate it.
So the Government would score heavily among Southern Catholics if Madhu is captured and pilgrimage is possible. This would be particularly so for the feast in July that has traditionally been attended by more Sinhala catholics than Tamil. The August feast has had more Tamils than Sinhalese.
There is also the cold war between Sinhala and Tamil Bishops over Madhu. Currently Madhu is under the purview of the Mannar diocese comprising the Vavuniya and Mannar districts.
The Catholic Bishops Conference has been wanting Madhu to be made a national shrine administered jointly by all the Catholic Dioceses.
However hard it may be to digest there is a strong lobby within the Sinhala hierarchy of the Catholic Church that welcomes military conquest over Madhu.
These latter – day incarnations of Cardinals Richelieu, Mazarin and Wolsey are shakers and movers within corridors of power.
[Reverend Ravappu Joseph (R), bishop of Mannar, and Catholic priests attend a protest in Mannar, Apr 2, 2007, as they called for the Lady Madu shrine not to be used for political or military purposes-Reuters via Yahoo! News]
It is against this backdrop that the fighting over Madhu continues.
On the other side of the equation is the LTTE.
In 1999 there was fighting in the region.Tamil church leaders were concerned about the safety of Madhy. They were reassured that the army would not move into Madhu. This in turn was conveyed to the tigers who apparently set up their defences away fro church vicinity.
But the army swooped down on Madhu causing much friction between the LTTE and Church dignitaries. Later the capture of Madhu was utilised for political propaganda in the South during elections.
Thereafter the sacred statue of our Lady of Madhu was taken on a penitential tour of the South to promote peace.
The tigers apparently feared a re – play of 1999 this time too. The LTTE also realised that Rajapakse with his bruised ego would really go to town with the capture of Madhu.
The military victory would have been proclaimed as a triumph and the sacred statue possibly exhibited as a prize. This is what the LTTE feared and there were reasons for this.
Thus the LTTE has firmly resisted attempts to seize Madhu and will continue to do so.Damage or destruction to the church is of no conseqquence to a military mindset.
The tigers scored “politically” when they exerted pressure on Church leaders to move the sacred statue out of Madhu.
By this action the Government has been denied the easy opportunity of gaining political capital out of Madhu. Like the saying about “Ayodhya being where Rama is” Madhu is where the Maadhaa is.
Without our Lady of Madhu statue the shrine loses its significance as a place of veneration and worship. Madhu church without Our Lady of Madhu is yet another Church.
Still the battle for Madhu would continue.
This is due to two reasons.
One is that the idea of setting up a military base in Mdhu is very much alive.The other is that once Madhu is taken pressure could be mounted to force the statue’s return.
In this situation there is the important question of whether the LTTE would allow the sacred statue to be returned to a military – controlled Madhu.
Given the efforts made by the LTTE in preventing a politico – military seizure of Madhu the tame return of the statue to military overlordship seems unlikely.
The only chance for the statue to be returned is for the armed forces to pull out from the Madhu region and an internationally imposed peace zone set up around the Church.
It is only then that the LTTE will allow the return of the statue is the opinion shared by many troubled Tamil Catholics.
If on the other hand pressure is exerted on many levels to get the statue back and also if the armed forces try to take it back militarily , I would not rule out an extreme possibility
Our Lady of Madhu is now among the fellowhip of the displaced. There is the danger of her joining the ranks of the diasappeared.
I hope I am wrong but I cannot see the LTTE allowing the return of the statue to an army – controlled Madhu. The easy way out for the tigers is to make the statue “disappear”.
Of course there would be an outcry but the LTTE will simply not care.
The tigers and even many Tamil Christians will not be too concerned about a Sri Lankan church and Global community that could not prevent the militarization of Madhu.
There is also the fact of so many Churches other than Madhu being damaged through military activity.
Prior to the Madhu offensive at least 299 big and small churches (Catholic, Protestant and Evangelical) have suffered in the North – East. 93 sustained major and 186 minor destruction. 20 churches underwent minor repairs due to war.
More than a dozen churches have been damaged in the Mannar area after the Adampan and Madhu offensives. Recently the Police returned seven statues to Mannar Bishop Rayappu Joseph.
This then is the situation. The danger of the displaced statue disappearing in the future cannot be ruled out.
If the statue is to return to Madhu then a sincere effort must be made to de – militarise the area and declare a zone of peace.
Let me conclude with a correction.
Last week I wrote that Thevaayanpitty adjoined Mulangaavil. That was a mistake.
Thevaayanpitty is close to Vellankulam and not Mulangaavil.
I also understand that the statue was not taken to Mulangaavil because it is in Kilinochchi district. That district along with Mullaitheevu and Jaffna form the Jaffna diocese.
Since Madhu is in Mannar diocese the statue could not be taken outside diocesan limits.
Even though there were plans to take it to the Cathedral in Mannar it was not possible because the entry – exit point in Uyilankulam was closed by the army and fighting was going on.
So the option was to take the statue further north point out church sources.
Incidently Thevaayanpitty is populated by a down-trodden Dalit community known as “paraiyar”.
Jesus Christ has been perceived as being on the side of the oppressed and persecuted.
Today the Sacred statue of Our Lady of Madhu is housed in a church whose members are pre- dominantly from an oppressed community.
The statue originally known as Our Lady of health at Manthai fled persecution at the hands of the Dutch and found refuge in the forests of Marudhamadhu where she transformed into Our Lady of the Rosary.
Now Our Lady seeks refuge at St. Xaviers Church whose parishioners are among the poor and oppressed..
The Mystique of “Madhumaadhaa” continues to flourish.
April 11th, 2008
by D.B.S. Jeyaraj
Dale Carnegie of “How to win Friends and Influence People” fame once observed that a man’s name is the sweetest sound in any language to him.Departed cabinet minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle and I had in common the sweetest sound of any language.
Being namesakes I was always attracted to any news report pertaining to him in the newspapers as the headings would inevitably have the word Jeyaraj in it.
Since he was a frank and forthright person who did not hesitate to make controversial pronouncements on many a topic he and by extension the name Jeyaraj was regularly in the news.
As a result I began following most developments concerning him almost as a matter of routine.
[Jeyaraj & Sudharshini Fernandopulle]
I must confess that I had become an admirer of the man particularly because of his political success despite his personal background.
In a country that is becoming increasingly divided on account of race and religion Jeyaraj was a unique personality.
He was a member of a miniscule ethnic community in Sri Lanka. Yet he managed to win five consecutive elections from a district overwhelmingly populated by people of other communities.
Canisius Jeyaraj Fernandopulle was a member of the small community called “Colombo Chetty”. He was of the Roman Catholic faith and his mother tongue was Tamil.
His native place is the village that was known as Manalsenai in Tamil and is now referred to as Welihena in Sinhala.
Jeyaraj was not a man who changed his religion or downplayed his ethnicity to succeed in politics. He never tried to cover up the fact that he was a minority community member.
But he was a man of the people whose mass appeal transcended barriers of ethnicity. I think he was the first and only member of the Colombo chetty community in post – Independence Sri Lanka to be elected to Parliament and made a cabinet minister.
In a sense he was like Pieter Keuneman who won the multi – ethnic Colombo Central electorate from 1947 – 1977 in spite of being ethnically a Burgher.
Though he was a popular politician Jeyaraj was a hard – headed realist who had no illusions about the nature of politics in this Country.
Some months ago there was much speculation in the media about Jeyaraj Fernandopulle eyeing the post of Prime minister. It was quickly nipped in the bud by Jeyaraj himself.
Being a minority community member within a minority, he stood no chance whatsoever of becoming prime minister of Sri Lanka was his candid comment.
Jeyaraj’s assertion spoke volumes about the true nature of Sri Lankan politics where from Independence all premiers and Presidents have been Sinhala, Buddhist and Govigama .
The only exception (or aberration) to this rule has been Ranasinghe Premadasa who was Sinhala and Buddhist but not Govigama.
There was also the case of Sir Oliver Goonetilleke being Governor – General. He was Sinhala and Govigama but a Christian.
Against such a backdrop it was hardly surprising that Jeyaraj ,a man fearlessly frank and openly forthright should have dismissed media speculation so easily.
Whether he had Prime Ministerial ambition or not Jeyaraj was realistic enough to understand that democracy in Sri Lanka was weighed heavily in favour of the “greatest good of the greatest number”.
The “greatest number” being defined as the largest race, religion and caste.
After his tragic death on Sunday April 6th 2008 at the hands of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) much mention has been made of Fernandopulle being a potential prime minister.
He has been compared to Lakshan Kadirgamar in this respect. Both stood firmly for the unity of Sri Lanka and boldly criticised the LTTE.
Since the prime minister is not a powerful position under the Presidential system it was possible that Kadirgamar and Fernandopulle could have become prime ministers it was speculated.
Lakshman Kadirgamar had ambition in that direction. He got carried away by the praise showered on him as Foreign inister for his patriotic zeal in conducting propaganda against the LTTE.
Kadirgamar was brought down to earth when he aimed for the PM post in 2004. Mahinda Rajapakse made his move and became Prime minister.
The Tamil, Christian, Vellala of Jaffna origin had no chance against the Sinhala, Buddhist, Govigama from the Ruhunu.
There was however a big difference between Kadirgamar and Fernandopulle. The former had no vote base to speak of and was always nominated to Parliament through the national list.
Jeyaraj was different in that respect. He was continuously elected to Parliament from the Gampaha district. His home turf was the electoral division of Katana but gathered votes widely from all over the district.
The secret of his success was his endearing appeal to people of all ethnicities. His record of service to the people is rather impressive.The “minority” community MP was a man of the people who mixed with the masses easliy.
It was his simplicity and common touch that got him ultimately. He died with and among people just in the way he had lived .
Given the fact that he was a top target of the tigers Jeyaraj’s security consciousness was appalling.
This cabinet minister goes as chief guest to what was basically a “village” marathon event. The organizers are not ready. So he chats with people and goes off to see a Buddhist priest of the area; he returns after a while contiues to talk with people; he delivers a pep talk to participants; he then flags off the start and meets with death.
The Television clip of the incident shows him surrounded and hemmed in with people as the explosion occurs.
From a security point of view it could be said that he was careless. But he was a popular politician who relied on the people as his power base.
Such people require constant mingling and inter – action with the ordinary people.
Jeyaraj is not the LTTE leader Prabakharan who derives his power from the barrel of a gun and not from the people.
The Parliamentarian was also fearless about death. The fact that the LTTE was targetting him did not make him retreat into a shell for safety. He went about his work as usual. For people like him there was no cocooning in the name of security.
When Puttalam district MP and nation building minister DM Dassanayake was killed by a claymore at Ja – ela on Jan 8th it was suspected that the intended target was Jeyaraj.
Intelligence reports warned him that the LTTE was out to get him but Jeyaraj refused to curtail his movements.
Foolhardy and foolish many people would say but incredibly brave and praiseworthy is the opinion of this columnist.
If one were to abandon one’s work and nature to preserve life then that quality of life itself leaves much to be desired. That is not the way of the Karmayogi and his sudharama as defined by the “Bhagwad Geeta”.
This philosophy is no consolation to his family and loved ones who would surely miss him.
It was only a short while ago that Jeyaraj with family members made a pilgrimage to the famous Tamil Nadu Catholic shrine at Velainganny. He seemed to have made his peace with God then .
The quiet bravery of Jeyaraj and others of his ilk who went about their life calmly despite a LTTE threat contrasts sharply with that of the LTTE leader himself.
The tiger supremo who has a “last supper” with the black tigers on suicide killing missions is a stickler for his personal security.
When journalists attended his press conference on April 10th 2002 they were subjected to rigorous security cheks ranging from exhibiting their tongues to removing footwear.
Such is the fear of potential danger and threat to life from the man who has had no qualms about ordering the deaths of all those who cross him.
Compared to the LTTE leader’s concern for his own safety the courage of people like Jeyaraj who went about everyday life with little fear stands out as commendable.
The LTTE is an organization with three different attributes.
It is a conventional militia when it adopts positional warfare to acquire or defend territory;
it is a guerilla organization when it conducts operations against economic,military or security targets;
it is a terrorist outfit when it kills democratic politicians or innocent civilians through exploding bombs and by assassinations.
The killing of Jeyaraj Fernandopulle along with fourteen others and the injuring of around 90 people through a black tiger is an act of terrorism. The LTTE must be condemned severely for this brutal act of terrorism.
LTTE supporters and propagandists seem overjoyed at Jeyaraj’s demise. His fearless criticism of the LTTE and doughty defence of the government had irked the LTTE considerably.
The LTTE media overseas is adopting as usual a two – track approach on the killing.
On the one hand it plays up real and imaginary differences within the Government about him.The insinuation is that the killing was an internal affair.
On the other hand the dead minister is being character assassinated and also depicted as a Tamil traitor. Jeyaraj is being portrayed as a “Tamil” who sold himself to the Sinhalese government and betrayed his own people.
This is a typical tiger tactic and deserves to be dismissed with contempt.
Jeyaraj Fernandopulle depended on votes from outside his community for electoral success. As such it was in his interest to pander to that external constituency alone.
There was no need and indeed it may have been politically counter – productive to emphasise his own ethnic identity.
The remarkable aspect of the man was that he did not do so. He always asserted his minority identity as a Tamil speaking , Roman Catholic, Colombo Chetty.
He spoke Sinhala, Tamil and English and was able to deliver excellent speeches in all three languages.
Whenever he addressed Tamil gatherings Jeyaraj always spke in Tamil. He would often speak in Tamil to fellow Tamil and Muslim MP’s within Parliamentary portals.
In mixed company Jeyaraj would talk in Tamil to Tamil – speakers and in Sinhala to Sinhala – speakers.
He has also been immensely helpful to many Tamils living in both the Gampaha and Colombo districts. Jeyaraj has done more for Tamils, both of Sri Lankan and Indian origin than many Tamil MP”s who use their ethnicity to enter Parliament.
He has always admitted that the Tamils in Sri Lanka faced many problems and required a comprehensive political solution. He has openly stated so inside and outside Parliament.
Jeyaraj however was firmly against separation and the LTTE. The solution he envisaged was within a united Sri Lanka.
There was a time when Jeyaraj visited Jaffna as an opposition MP and engaged in discussion with the LTTE. He wanted to help reach a solution providing justice to the Tamils in a united Lanka.
Even as recently as the Geneva talks Fernandopulle was a Government delegate. He tried very hard to reach some understanding with the LTTE.
He was rebuffed. It was with a great sense of sadness – shared with some of his friends – that Jeyaraj reached the conclusion of war with the LTTE being unavoidable.
There could be no solution within a united Sri Lanka as long as the LTTE remained a powerful player he felt.
It was therefore with clarity of conviction that he criticised the LTTE boldly and supported the Government’s war against the tigers.
Jeyaraj re-iterated privately and publicly that a political solution was necessary for the Tamils and that he would strive for one after the LTTE was decisively weakened.
The LTTE and its minions would have us believe that those Tamils who criticise them are Tamil traitors. This is not so. Jeyaraj was a perfect example of being supportive of Tamil rights while being critical of the LTTE.
Though a part of the Rajapakse regime Jeyaraj has also maintained his independence
Jeyaraj was at one time close to the Bandaranaike’s but later threw in his lot with Rajapakse after the party appointed Mahinda as presidential candidate. Yet he has also been critical openly of the shabby treatment meted out to the Bandaranaikes.
Jeyaraj along with Nimal Siripala de Silva, Maithripala Sirisena forms the senior ministerial triumvirate around Rajapakse. In recent times he became the Government’s staunch defender and unofficial spokesperson.
He was devastatingly critical of opponents in Parliament and would also answer on behalf of the Government as chief whip. He would very often articulate the Government viewpoint.
He engaged in harsh banter with opposition MP’s but always maintained friendly relations with them.
He would go to unexpected lengths in his zeal to defend the Government. Once he called UN officials as being in the pay of the LTTE.
In recent times Jeyaraj had become very close to the Rajapakse dynasty and defended its interests stoutly.
This columnist once referred to him as the “Rajapakse Rotweiler”. He was not offended and indeed seemed amused quipping that the canine was indeed a fierce animal.
[With Pope John Paul II-pic:jeyaraj.org]
Canisius Jeyaraj Fernandopulle was born on January 11th 1953 at Welihena/Manalsenai in Kochikade close to Negombo.
He was the son of BF and Alice Mary Fernandopulle. Jeyaraj was the third of eight children (Scholastica, Nihal, Jeyaraj, Sisinia, Felician, Jude,Priyantha, Priyadarshini) . His father was an official in the Prisons dept.
He had his primary education at Ave Maria convent and secondary education at Maris Stella , Negombo. He displayed leadership qualities in school and was head prefect.
In 1972 Jeyaraj became a science and maths teacher at the Welihena Govt school.
He entered Law College in 1974 and passed out as an attorney at law in 1977.
He won the silver medal in the Address to the jury in Sinhala, at Law College. He was appointed as the secretary of the SLFP branch of the Law College in the year 1975
He apprenticed under the famous Negombo Advocate Camillus Rodrigo He began practicing on his own in the Magistrates Court of Negombo and the High Court of Negombo in December 1977. He built up a lucrative practice in Negombo.
Jeyaraj appeared in hundreds of criminal cases in courts. In labor tribunals he appeared for many litigants who had lost their jobs. He has also appeared without charging fees in about 12,000 cases for those who couldn’t afford to hire lawyers.
He cut his political teeth as a 17 year old in 1970 by being counting agent for a candidate contesting the Katana village council. Jeyaraj then worked for the SLFP in the Katana by – election of 1974 and in the general election of 1977.
It was actor-politico Vijaya Kumaranathunga who contested Katana against Wijepala Mendis in 1977. Jeyaraj was closely associated with Vijaya and later Chandrika at one time.
When the couple split and formed the SLMP in 1984 Jeyaraj remained with the SLFP and close to Sirima and Anura Bandaranaike.
He was made Katana SLFP organizer in 1984. He first won from the Gampaha district in the polls of 1989. Thereafter he was re – elected in 1994, 2000, 2001 and 2004.
In 1994 he wasappointed as the DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE, ETHNIC AFFAIRS & NATIONAL INTEGRATION and was later appointed as DEPUTY MINISTER OF PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, NATIONAL INTEGRATION & ETHNIC AFFAIRS, the same year.
In 1997 he was appointed as the Minister of Plan Implementation and Parliamentary Affairs.
In 2000 he was re elected and appointed as the Minister of Civil Aviation, Tourism and Christian Religion Affairs
In 2004 he was re-elected as a Member of the Parliament and was appointed as the minister of trade, commerce, consumer affairs and chief government whip of parliament.
In 2005, after the Presidential election he was appointed as the Minister of Trade Commerce, Consumer Affairs & Marketing Development and minister of Highways.
In 1995 Jeyaraj Fernandopulle formed the Educational Development Foundation that has performed yeoman service in that sphere in the areas of Katana, Negombo and Ja-ela.
Among services provided are scholarships for more than 3000 underprivileged O.L students, around 125 scholarships to undergraduates, supply of free equipment to schools etc
The mission statement posted on his personal website encapsulates the life philosophy of service ingrained in the man. This is what it says -
“I believe in making available to all our children, of all communities, the best of education.I am committed to helping the poor people in our community by providing them land and other facilities, without any political influence.I am also committed to uplifting the quality of life in our communities by providing them services such as water service, health care, jobs, and electricity. Etc.”.
Jeyaraj is married to Sudharshini a medical doctor specialising in family health. The Fernandopulles have two children. The girl Samurdhi is a student at. St. Bridgettes while the boy Bhanuka is a student at Colombo International School.
Both Jeyaraj and wife Sudharshini are from Welihena or Manalsenai as it is known in Tamil.Kochikade, Manalsenai, Thoppu and Waikkal are places where a substantial number of Colombo Chetty and Bharatha community people have been living.
These communities are an integral part of Western coast Tamils living in Gampaha and Puttalam districts.
An analysis of Tamil social formations in Sri Lanka reveal that they are of four broad categories, Northern, Eastern, Up – Country and Negombo – Puttalam Tamils.
Many of the Catholic Tamils in the Puttalam-Negombo region underwent “ethnic transformation” after the medium of instruction was changed from Tamil to Sinhala in about 60 – 70 schools run by the Catholic church.
While the older generation speaks Tamil the new generation is more at home in Sinhala.Many old timers have Tamil dressing styles and cooking habits still.
An indicator of this change is manifested in Manalsenai itself. The place was known as Manalsenai at the time of independence but nowadays it is called Welihena the Sinhala equivalent.
The Colombo Chetty comunity to which Jeyaraj Fernandopulle belongs possesses an interestig history.
The Chetty or setti (sethi in North india)community of South India is classified as Vaishya according to Manu dharma.
The Vaishyas are of three categories. Dhana vaishya, Poo vaishya and Ko vaishya. The Dhana viashyas have traditionally engaged in commerce and trade.
Originally from South India , it is said that there has been a widespread Chetti presence in Sri Lanka even before the advent of Vijaya.
The five Eeshwarams at Thiruketheeswaram. Koneswaram, Thandeeswaram. Muneeswaram and Nauleswaram were built by Chetty Saivaites.
Gradually the Chetty community got absorbed into the Sinhala and Tamil communities. In Sinhala they became known as Hetti.
Place names like Hettiawatte, Hettigoda, Hettipola, Hettimulla etc in Sinhala and Chettipaalayam, Chettykulam etc in Tamil demonstrate the Chetty influence.
During the time of the Kotte kingdom and the arrival of the Portugese a substantial chetty community thrived in Colombo and environs.
Most of them embraced the Catholic faith and became a distinct entity known as Colombo chetty. Likewise there is a community in Malaysia known as Malacca chetty.
The bulk of the Chetty commuity spoke Tamil though there were Vaishya members from the Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada regions also. It must be remmbered that Tamil was the” lingua franca” of commerce in South and South – east Asia in those times.
The National census of 1814 shows the total population as 492,083 of which Chetties were 2459; In 1824 the total population was 851,940 of which Chetties were 8471,:In the population census of 1871 total population was 2,401,066 of which the Chetties were down to 3114.
Thereafter the Chetties were classified as Tamils in the official census but retained their Colombo Chetty identity. Some of the greatest Tamil scholars like Simon Casie Chitt were from this community.
Gradually under British rule English became widely spoken among Colombo chetties. There was also much inter – marrying with other ethnic groups particularly Burghers. Many were absorbed into other ethnic groups.
Current estimates say there are about 175,000 Colombo Chetties living mainly in the Southern,Western and North – Western provinces.
The 1983 July anti-Tamil pogrom saw many Colombo Chetties being attacked.Some panic-stricken leaders of the community prevailed upon President JR Jayewardena (who himself has chetty ancesty) to demarcate them as a separate community.
They were recognized as a distinct ethnic group ratified by the registrar General’s Department the notice of which was published in the Observer newspaper of 17th October 1984.In the “incomplete” 2001 census ,the Colombo Chetties were classified independently.
The chetties have contributed substantially in the intellectual realm. De Melho translated both biblical testaments into Tamil. John J. Casie Chetty’s translated Voet’s Roman Dutch Law into English.
Many chetties have claimed several ‘firsts’ for the former “Ceylon”.. Among them are Simon Casie Chitty the First Civil Servant and Publisher of the first gazetteer, Dr. Peter Philip Jurgen Quint Ondaatje was the first Asian to figure in modern European history: Rev. Philip de Melho was the first Ceylonese to be admitted to the Christian ministry; Henry Francis Muttukrishna was the first Tamil Barrister in Asia. Dr. William Charles Ondaatje was the first Ceylonese director of the Botanical Gardens he introduced the olive to Sri Lanka, Dr Simon de Melho Aserappa was the first Ceylonese who obtained the degree of Doctor of Medicine from a British University; John J Casie Chetty was the first Bachelor of Civil Laws (Oxford) in Asia, Arthur L R Aserappa was the first Ceylonese who won the Cambridge Junior Exhibition .
Among others with Colombo Chetty antecedents are rationalist / lawyer Mervyn Casie Chetty, Cricketers Roy Dias, Michael Tissera, Advertising maestro Reggie Candappa, Rukmani Devi (Daisy Daniels)Michael and Christopher Ondaatje and also the Buddhist reformer Ven Soma Maha Thera (Victor Perera Pulle)
[Jeyaraj Fernandopulle-AP Photo/Eranga Jayawardena, File-via Yahoo! News]
Jeyaraj Fernandopulle is the first Colombo chetty to be an elected Parliamentarian and cabinet minister from the community. As stated before his is an outstanding achievement because he did not depend on his own ethnic group for votes.
In spite of being classified as a distinct community after 1983 many Colombo Chetties have continued to emphasise their “Tamilness”. Chief among them has been Jeyaraj Fernandopulle.
It is very seldom that a man of his calibre emerges among politicians. Jeyaraj was the model Sri Lankan politician of the future with tri-lingual fluency.
His loss would be felt greatly. It is to some extent irreplaceable.
As for me I will miss seeing “our” name in the newspapers.
DBS Jeyaraj can be contacted on: djeyaraj@federalidea.com
April 11th, 2008
The High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour has strongly condemned the suicide bombing which killed a Government minister and at least 14 other people at the start of a marathon in Sri Lanka, on 6 April. She also extended her condolences to the bereaved families of the victims, as the funerals of the victims continued to take place on Thursday.
The bomb, which killed Highways Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, along with a former top marathon runner and the national athletics coach, as they were about to see off the runners in Weliweriya, also injured dozens of other athletes and onlookers.
“Such violence shows a complete disregard for the right to life and security of Sri Lankans, and breaches the most fundamental principles of international law,” Arbour said.
The attack is alleged to have been committed by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which has been accused of other recent attacks, including bombings of public transport and in other public places.
“I remind the LTTE and other armed groups that attacks which directly or indiscriminately target civilians are crimes under international law,” the High Commissioner said. “Violent attacks on people taking no active part in hostilities are strictly prohibited.” Such acts of violence also undermine efforts for a meaningful dialogue on improving the situation of the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka, she said.
[UNHCHR Press Release]
April 10th, 2008
Churches damaged/destroyed by Aerial bombing and shelling in the North of Island of Sri Lanka:
[Fully damaged = 93 Partially damaged =186 Minor Repair = 20]
Not all the Churches damaged and destroyed are included in this list. The real figure is higher.
Name of Church Parish Address A.G.A. Division Extent of the damage:
1.St. Liguri’s Church Chavakachcheri Parish Chavakachcheri Chavakachcheri Fully damaged
2.Our Lady of Lourdes Chavakachcheri Parish Madduvil Chavakachcheri Fully damaged
3.Atputha Matha Chavakachcheri Parish Navatkuli Chavakachcheri Partially damaged
4.St. Anthony’s Church Chavakachcheri Parish Kerathivu Road Chavakachcheri Partially damaged
5.Our Lady of Madhu Chavakachcheri Parish Navatkuli Chavakachcheri Partially damaged
6.St. Anthony’s Church Chunnakam Erlalai Parish Chunnakam Chunnakam Partially damaged
7.St. Francis Xavier’s Church Chunnakam Erlalai Parish Kulamangal Chunnakam Partially damaged
8.Our Lady of Miracles Chunnakam Erlalai Parish Mallakam Chunnakam Partially damaged
9.Our Lady of Perpetual Help Chunnakam Erlalai Parish Mallakam Chunnakam Fully damaged
10.St. Isidore’s Church Chunnakam Erlalai Parish Erlalai Chunnakam Partially damaged
11.St. Theresa’s Church Chunnakam Erlalai Parish Sooravathai Chunnakam Partially damaged
12.Pius The Xth Chunnakam Erlalai Parish Kadduvan Chunnakam Fully damaged
13.St. John the Baptist Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
14.St. Xavier’s Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
15.St. James’ Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
16.St. Anthony’s Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
17.St. Thomas’ Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
18.St. Lawrence’s Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
19.St. Mary’s Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
20.Our Lady of Fatima Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
21.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
22.St. Anthony’s Church Delft Parish Delft Delft Minor Repair
23.St. Mary’s Cathedral Cathedral Parish P.O.Box : 2, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
24.St. Sebastian’s Church Cathedral Parish P.O.Box : 2, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
25.St. Roche’s Church Cathedral Parish P.O.Box : 2, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
26.Our Lady of Mount Carmel Cathedral Parish P.O.Box : 2, Jaffna Jaffna Minor Repair
27.St. Hichola’s Church Navanthurai Parish Navanthurai Jaffna Partially damaged
28.St. Mary’s Church Navanthurai Parish Navanthurai Jaffna Partially damaged
29.St. Sebastian’s Church Navanthurai Parish Oddumadam Jaffna Partially damaged
30.Our Lady of Good Health Navanthurai Parish Anjananthalvu Jaffna Partially damaged
31.Our Lady of Holy Rosary Navanthurai Parish Chippithurai Jaffna Partially damaged
32.Our Lady of Refuge Church O.L.R.Parish 4th Cross Street, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
33.St. Anne’s Church Pandianthalvu Parish Pandianthalvu, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
34.Christ the King Church Pandianthalvu Parish Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
35.Our Lady of Fatima Pandianthalvu Parish Koiathoddam Jaffna Partially damaged
36.St. Anthony’s Church Passaiyoor Parish Passaiyoor Jaffna Fully damaged
37.Our Lady of Holy Rosary Passaiyoor Parish Colombuthurai Jaffna Partially damaged
38.St. Joseph’s Church Passaiyoor Parish Valanpuram Jaffna Partially damaged
39.Church of Holy Reedemer Passaiyoor Parish Manianthoddam Jaffna Fully damaged
40.St. James’ Church Passaiyoor Parish Vasanthapuram Jaffna Fully damaged
41.St. Sebastian’s Church Passaiyoor Parish Uthyapuram Jaffna Fully damaged
42.St. Sebastian’s Church Passaiyoor Parish Mannithali Jaffna Fully damaged
43.St. Antony’s Church Passaiyoor Parish Mandaikallaru Jaffna Fully damaged
44.Joseph Vaz Shrine Shrine Kottaddy Panna Jaffna Partially damaged
45.St. James’ Church St. James’ Parish Gurunagar, Jaffna Jaffna Fully damaged
46.Our Lady of Miracles St. James’ Parish Gurunagar, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
47.St. John the Baptist Church St. John’s Parish Hospital Rd, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
48.St. Theresa’s Church St. John’s Parish Chundikuly, Jaffna Jaffna Partially damaged
49.St. Joseph’s Church Vaddakachchi Parish Vaddakachchi Karachchi East Partially damaged
50.St. Roche’s Church Vaddakachchi Parish Ramanathapuram Karachchi East Partially damaged
51.St. Paul’s Church Vaddakachchi Parish Kalmadhu Karachchi East Partially damaged
52.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Vaddakachchi Parish Mumykulam Karachchi East Partially damaged
53.Our Lady of Madhu Vaddakachchi Parish Iranaimaddu Karachchi East Fully damaged
54.St. Antony’s Church Vaddakachchi Parish Navatkudhu Karachchi East Partially damaged
55.St. Anthony’s Church Karaveddy Parish Vathiri Karaveddy Partially damaged
56.St. Mary’s Church Karaveddy Parish Karaveddy Karaveddy Partially damaged
57.Our Lady of Perpetual Help Karaveddy Parish Thannalai Karaveddy Partially damaged
58.St. Sebastian’s Church Karaveddy Parish Valvettithurai Karaveddy Partially damaged
59.Holy Redeemer’s Church Karaveddy Parish Cidupiddy Karaveddy Partially damaged
60.Sacred Heart Church Karaveddy Parish Varani Karaveddy Partially damaged
61.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Karaveddy Parish Saraiaddi Karaveddy Partially damaged
62.St. Mary’s Church Kayts Parish Suruvil Road, Kayts Kayts Partially damaged
63.St. Antony’s Church Kayts Parish Suruvil Road, Kayts Kayts Partially damaged
64.St. James’ Church Kayts Parish Suruvil Road, Kayts Kayts Fully damaged
65.St. Joseph’s Church Kayts Parish Suruvil Road, Kayts Kayts Partially damaged
66.St. Thomas Church Kayts Parish Eluvaithivu Kayts Minor Repair
67.St. Antony’s Church Kayts Parish Nainathivu Kayts Minor Repair
68.Our Lady of Good Health Kayts Parish Analathivu Kayts Minor Repair
69.St. Theresa’s Church Kilinochchi Parish Kili Kilinochchi Fully damaged
70.Infant Jesus Kilinochchi Parish 54th Mile Post Kilinochchi Fully damaged
71.St. Sebastian’s Church Kilinochchi Parish Parathipuram Kilinochchi Fully damaged
72.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Kilinochchi Parish Viveknagar Kilinochchi Fully damaged
73.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Kilinochchi Parish Kanagapuram Kilinochchi Fully damaged
75.74.St. Mary’s Church Kilinochchi Parish Kanagapuram Kilinochchi Fully damaged
76.St. Antony’s Church Paranthan Parish Mullaithevu Road, Paran Kilinochchi Fully damaged
77.St. Francis Xavier’s Church Paranthan Parish Tharmapuram Kilinochchi Partially damaged
78.St. Antony’s Church Paranthan Parish Nallathannithoduvai Kilinochchi Partially damaged
79.Infant Jesus Paranthan Parish Visuvamadhu Kilinochchi Partially damaged
80.St. Sebastian’s Church Paranthan Parish Periyakulam Kilinochchi Partially damaged
81.Our Lady of Perpetual Help Paranthan Parish Mursamoddai Kilinochchi Fully damaged
82.St. Anne’s Church Paranthan Parish Elephant Pass Kilinochchi Fully damaged
83.St. Peter & Paul’s Church Paranthan Parish Visuvamadhu Kilinochchi Partially damaged
84.St. Mary’s Church Paranthan Parish Poonaithoduvai Kilinochchi Fully damaged
85.St. Mary’s Church Paranthan Parish Pepaipiddy Kilinochchi Partially damaged
86.Divine Mercy Paranthan Parish Peramathannaru Kilinochchi Partially damaged
87.Our Lady of Fatima’s Church Uruthirapuram Parish Uruthirapuram Kilinochchi Fully damaged
88.St. Anthony’s Church Uruthirapuram Parish Jayanthinagar Kilinochchi Fully damaged
89.St. Jude’s Church Uruthirapuram Parish Jayanthinagar Kilinochchi Fully damaged
90.St. Sebastian’s Church Uruthirapuram Parish Konavil Kilinochchi Partially damaged
91.St. Anthony’s Church Uruthirapuram Parish Unionkulam Kilinochchi Fully damaged
92.Christ the King Church Uruthirapuram Parish Oottupulam Kilinochchi Partially damaged
93.St. Joseph’s Church Atchuvely/Palaly Parish Atchuvely Kopay Partially damaged
94.St. Anthony’s Church Atchuvely/Palaly Parish Atchuvely Kopay Partially damaged
95.St. Rita’s Church Atchuvely/Palaly Parish Navakiri Kopay Partially damaged
96.Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Atchuvely/Palaly Parish Vasavilan Kopay Fully damaged
97.St. Mary’s Church Atchuvely/Palaly Parish Ottagapulam Kopay Fully damaged
98.St. James’ Church Atchuvely/Palaly Parish Palaly South Kopay Fully damaged
99.Holy Rosary Atchuvely/Palaly Parish Tholakatti Kopay Fully damaged
100.St. Anthony’s Church Manipay Parish Manipay Manipay Partially damaged
101.St. Anne’s Church Manipay Parish Manipay Manipay Partially damaged
102.Church of Holy Family Manipay Parish Malvam Manipay Partially damaged
103.Church of Holy Rosary Manipay Parish Uduvil Manipay Partially damaged
104.Church of Ascension Manipay Parish Madaththadi Manipay Partially damaged
105.St. Joseph’s Church Manipay Parish Aladi Uduvil Manipay Partially damaged
106.St. Anthony’s Church Thalaiyadi Parish Thalaiyadi Maruthankerni Fully damaged
107.St. Philip Neri’s Church Thalaiyadi Parish Champainpattu Maruthankerni Fully damaged
108.St. Anthony’s Church Thalaiyadi Parish Vettilaikerni Maruthankerni Fully damaged
109.St. Mary’s Church Thalaiyadi Parish Kattaikadu Maruthankerni Fully damaged
110.St. Mary’s Church Thalaiyadi Parish Kudarappu Maruthankerni Fully damaged
111.St. Francis Xavier’s Church Thalaiyadi Parish Nagarkovil Maruthankerni Fully damaged
112.St. Nicholas Mirusuvil Parish Mirusuvil Mirusuvil Partially damaged
113.St. Mary’s Church Mirusuvil Parish Killaly Mirusuvil Fully damaged
114.St. Anthony’s Church Mirusuvil Parish Killaly Mirusuvil Fully damaged
115.St. Michael’s Church Mirusuvil Parish Killaly Mirusuvil Fully damaged
116.St. Thomas Church Mirusuvil Parish Killaly Mirusuvil Fully damaged
117.St. James’ Church Mirusuvil Parish Killaly Mirusuvil Fully damaged
118.St. Anthony’s Church Alampil/Mullaithivu Alampil Mullaithivu Fully damaged
119.St. Jude’s Church Alampil/Mullaithivu Nayaru Mullaithivu Fully damaged
120.St. Antony’s Church Alampil/Mullaithivu Thanniyootu Mullaithivu Partially damaged
121.St. Joseph’s Church Alampil/Mullaithivu Kulamurippu Mullaithivu Partially damaged
122.St. Theresa’s Church Alampil/Mullaithivu Mulliyavalai Mullaithivu Fully damaged
123.Annai Vellarnkanni Alampil/Mullaithivu Alampil Mullaithivu Partially damaged
124.St. Anthony’s Church Alampil/Mullaithivu Kepapulovu Mullaithivu Partially damaged
125.Christ the King Church Alampil/Mullaithivu Oddusuddan Mullaithivu Fully damaged
126.St. Peter’s Church Mullaithivu Mullaithivu Mullaithivu Fully damaged
127.St. Mary’s Church Mullaithivu Mullaithivu Mullaithivu Fully damaged
128.St. Jude’s Church Mullaithivu Selvapuram Mullaithivu Fully damaged
129.St. Isidore’s Church Mullaithivu Silavathai Mullaithivu Fully damaged
130.St. Anne’s Church Mullaithivu Silavathai Mullaithivu Fully damaged
131.Our Lady of Lourdes Mullaithivu Vattapalai Mullaithivu Partially damaged
132.Infant Jesus Mullaithivu Uddupukulam Mullaithivu Partially damaged
133.Annai Vellarnkanni Mullaithivu Deogunagar Mullaithivu Partially damaged
134.Our Lady of Lourdes Mullaithivu Pandarakulam Mullaithivu Fully damaged
135.St. Joseph’s Church Mullaithivu Muthaiyankaddu Mullaithivu Fully damaged
136.St. Jude’s Church Ariyalai Parish Ariyalai, Jaffna Nallur Fully damaged
137.Our Lady of Valankanni Ariyalai Parish Ariyalai, Jaffna Nallur Fully damaged
138.St. Sebastian Church Ariyalai Parish Poompukar, Jaffna Nallur Fully damaged
139.St. Francis Xavier’s Church Kopay Parish Thirunelvely Nallur Partially damaged
140.St. Mary’s Church Kopay Parish Kopay South Nallur Partially damaged
141.St. Joseph’s Church Kopay Parish Kopay North Nallur Partially damaged
142.St. Paul’s Church Kopay Parish Kokuvil Nallur Fully damaged
143.St. Benedict’s Church St. Benedict’s Parish Kachcheri Nallur Rd, Jaf Nallur Fully damaged
144.Our Lady of Good Health Mugamalai Parish Mugamalai Palai Fully damaged
145.St. Peter & Paul’s Church Mugamalai Parish Pulopalai Palai Fully damaged
146.St. Mary’s Church Mugamalai Parish Palai Palai Fully damaged
147.St. Francis Xavier’s Church Mugamalai Parish Iyakachchi Palai Fully damaged
148.St. Anthony’s Church Mugamalai Parish Vannankulam Palai Fully damaged
149.St. Barbara’s Church Mugamalai Parish Ithavil Palai Palai Fully damaged
150.St. Sebastian’s Church Mugamalai Parish Puluveli Palai Fully damaged
151.Our Lady of Reparation Mugamalai Parish Palai Palai Fully damaged
152.St. Joseph’s Church Mugamalai Parish Eluthumadduval Palai Fully damaged
153.St. Mary’s Church Myliddy Parish Myliddy Palaly Fully damaged
154.St. Sebastian’s Church Myliddy Parish Palaly Palaly Fully damaged
155.Arokiamatha Myliddy Parish Palalythurai Palaly Fully damaged
156.St. Anthony’s Church Myliddy Parish Oorany K.K.S. Palaly Fully damaged
157.St. John the Baptist Church Myliddy Parish Veemankamam Palaly Fully damaged
158.St. Peter & Paul’s Myliddy Parish Tellipalai Palaly Fully damaged
159.St. Joseph’s Church Myliddy Parish Kankesanthurai-KKS Palaly Fully damaged
160.Church of Our Lady of Good V Myliddy Parish Kankesanthurai-KKS Palaly Fully damaged
161.St. Pius Church Myliddy Parish Tellipalai Palaly Fully damaged
162.St. Mary’s Church Myliddy Parish Mulavai, Myliddy Palaly Fully damaged
163.St. Thomas Church Point Pedro Parish Point Pedro Point Pedro Partially damaged
164.St. Anthony’s Church Point Pedro Parish Kaladdi Point Pedro Partially damaged
165.St. Mary’s Church Point Pedro Parish Thumpalai Point Pedro Partially damaged
166.Our Lady of Lourdes Point Pedro Parish Thumpalai Point Pedro Partially damaged
167.St. Joseph’s Church Point Pedro Parish Puloly South Point Pedro Partially damaged
168.St. Francis Xavier’s Church Point Pedro Parish Sakkodai Point Pedro Partially damaged
169.St. Anthony’s Church Point Pedro Parish Manatkaddu Point Pedro Partially damaged
170.St. Peter & Paul’s Church Point Pedro Parish Kudathanai Point Pedro Partially damaged
171.St. Sebastian’s Church Point Pedro Parish Katkovalam Point Pedro Partially damaged
172.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Point Pedro Parish Nadukudathanai Point Pedro Fully damaged
173.Church of Infant Jesus Point Pedro Parish Polikandy Point Pedro Partially damaged
174.St. Antony’s Church Jayapuram Jeyapuram Poonagari Partially damaged
St. Jude’s Church Jayapuram Raplaikadu Poonagari Partially damaged
175.R.C. Church Jayapuram Sekkalai Poonagari Partially damaged
176.Joseph Vaz Shrine Jayapuram Seemankundanu Poonagari Partially damaged
177.Sacred Heart Church Jayapuram Thapirai Poonagari Partially damaged
178.Our Lady of Refuge Church Jayapuram Poonagari Poonagari Fully damaged
179.Sacred Heart Church Jayapuram Annaivilunthanpalai Poonagari Partially damaged
180.R.C. Church Jayapuram Pallikudah Poonagari Partially damaged
181.St. Antony’s Church Jayapuram Kavtharimunai Poonagari Fully damaged
182.R.C. Church Jayapuram Nallur Poonagari Fully damaged
183.St. James’ Church Kumulamunai Nachchikudah Poonagari Partially damaged
184.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Kumulamunai Nachchikudah Poonagari Partially damaged
185.St. Anthony’s Church Kumulamunai Kumulamunai Poonagari Partially damaged
186.St. Thomas Church Kumulamunai Karadikundu Poonagari Partially damaged
187.St. Peter’s Church Kumulamunai Nochimunai Poonagari Partially damaged
188.Holy Sprit Church Kumulamunai Santhapuram Poonagari Partially damaged
189.Mulankavil Matha Church Mulankavil Mulankavil Poonagari Partially damaged
190.St. Antony’s Church Mulankavil 19th Mile Post Poonagari Partially damaged
191.St. Mary’s Church Mulankavil Nagapaduvan Poonagari Partially damaged
192.St. Mary’s Church Mulankavil Iranainagar Poonagari Partially damaged
193.Infant Jesus Chapel Mulankavil Mulankavil Poonagari Partially damaged
194.St. Anne’s Church Valaipadu Parish Valaipadu Poonagari Partially damaged
195.Christ the King Church Valaipadu Parish Kiranchi Poonagari Partially damaged
196.Our Lady of Perpetual Help Valaipadu Parish Veravil Poonagari Partially damaged
197.St. Jude’s Church Valaipadu Parish Palavi Poonagari Partially damaged
198.Our Lady of Lourdes Valaipadu Parish Valaipadu Poonagari Partially damaged
199.Infant Jesus Church Valaipadu Parish Kiranchi Poonagari Minor Repair
200.St. Anthony’s Church Valaipadu Parish Kiranchi Poonagari Minor Repair
201.St. Mary’s Church Valaipadu Parish Ilavankudah Poonagari Minor Repair
202.St. Mary’s Church Valaipadu Parish Iranaithivu Poonagari Fully damaged
203.Our Lady of Fatima Iranaippalai Iranaippalai Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
204.Our Lady of Refuge Church Iranaippalai Mathalan Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
205.Our Lady of Rosary Iranaippalai Valian Madam Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
206.St. Antony’s Church Iranaippalai Mathalan Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
207.St. Antony’s Church Iranaippalai Idaikadu Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
208.St. Antony’s Church Iranaippalai Mullivaikal Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
209.St. Sebastian’s Church Iranaippalai Anadapuram Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
210.Infant Jesus Iranaippalai Iranaipalai Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
211.St. Joseph’s Church Puthukuddyiruppu Puthukuddyiruppu Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
212.St. Antony’s Church Puthukuddyiruppu Malikaithivu Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
213.St. James’ Church Puthukuddyiruppu Mongilkalaru Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
214.St. Jude’s Church Puthukuddyiruppu Suthanthirapuram Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
215.Christ the King Church Puthukuddyiruppu Udayarkaddu Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
216.St. Mary’s Church Puthukuddyiruppu Devipuram Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
217.St. Anthony’s Church Puthukuddyiruppu Udayarkaddu Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
218.Annai Vellarnkanni Puthukuddyiruppu Theravil Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
219.Annai Vellarnkanni Puthukuddyiruppu Manthuvil Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
220.Holy Face Church Puthukuddyiruppu Manthuvil Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
221.St. Eugene De Mazond Puthukuddyiruppu Kaiveli Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
222.Infant Jesus Puthukuddyiruppu Puthukuddyiruppu Puthukuddyiruppu Partially damaged
223.Church of our Lady of Refuge Annaikoddai Parish Anaikoddai Sandilipay Partially damaged
224.St. Peter & Paul’s Church Annaikoddai Parish Navaly Sandilipay Fully damaged
225.Sacred Heart Church Annaikoddai Parish Theverkaddu Sandilipay Partially damaged
226.St. Anne’s Church Ilavalai Parish Ilavalai Sandilipay Partially damaged
227.St. James’ Church Ilavalai Parish Ilavalai Sandilipay Partially damaged
228.St. Jude’s Church Ilavalai Parish Ilavalai Sandilipay Partially damaged
229.St. Cajetan’s Church Ilavalai Parish Marisankoodal Sandilipay Partially damaged
230.Our Lady of Lourdes Ilavalai Parish Poity Sandilipay Partially damaged
231.Our Lady of Perpetual Help Ilavalai Parish Sahayampuram Sandilipay Fully damaged
232.St. Francis of Assist Ilavalai Parish Valankadu Sandilipay Fully damaged
233.St. Rita’s Church Ilavalai Parish Ilavalai Sandilipay Partially damaged
234.St. Anne’s Church Ilavalai Parish Valithundal Sandilipay Fully damaged
235.St. Philip Neri’s Church Ilavalai Parish Pathavathai Sandilipay Partially damaged
236.St. Roche’s Church Ilavalai Parish Senthankulam Sandilipay Fully damaged
237.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Ilavalai Parish Mylankoodal Sandilipay Fully damaged
238.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Manipay Parish Anthiran Sandilipay Partially damaged
239.St. Jude’s Church Manipay Parish Suthumalai Sandilipay Partially damaged
240.Our Lady of Madhu Manipay Parish Kadudai Sandilipay Partially damaged
241.Infant Jesus Manipay Parish Sanguvely Sandilipay Partially damaged
242.St. Thomas’ Church Mathagal Parish Mathagal Sandilipay Partially damaged
243.St. Anthony’s Church Mathagal Parish Mathagal Sandilipay Partially damaged
244.St. Sebastian’s Church Mathagal Parish Mathagal Sandilipay Partially damaged
245.Shrine of Our Lady of Lourdes Mathagal Parish Mathagal Sandilipay Partially damaged
246.St. Joseph’s Church Mathagal Parish Mathagal Sandilipay Partially damaged
247.Church of Our Lady of Fatima Panditheripu Parish Panditheripu Sandilipay Partially damaged
248.St. Anthony’s Church Panditheripu Parish Panditheripu Sandilipay Partially damaged
249.Church of Our Lady of Rosary Panditheripu Parish Panditheripu Sandilipay Partially damaged
250.St. Theresa’s Church Panditheripu Parish Sandilipay Sandilipay Partially damaged
251.St. John the Baptist Church Panditheripu Parish Periyavillan Sandilipay Partially damaged
252.St. Anthony’s Church Panditheripu Parish Periyavillan Sandilipay Partially damaged
253.St. Joseph’s Church Panditheripu Parish Alaveddi Sandilipay Partially damaged
254.St. Sebastian’s Church Panditheripu Parish Mahyapiddy Sandilipay Partially damaged
255.St. Mary’s Church Sillalai Parish Sillalai Sandilipay Partially damaged
256.St. James’ Church Sillalai Parish Sillalai Sandilipay Partially damaged
257.St. Francis De Sales Sillalai Parish Chankanai Sandilipay Minor Repair
258.Our Lady of Holy Rosary Sillalai Parish Moolai Sandilipay Fully damaged
259.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Amathipuram Parish Vanneri Rd,Amathipuram Thunnukai Partially damaged
260.St. Anthony’s Church Amathipuram Parish Skanthapuram Thunnukai Fully damaged
261.St. Mary’s Church Amathipuram Parish Vannerikulam Thunnukai Partially damaged
262.Our Lady of Miracles Amathipuram Parish Ponnagar Thunnukai Partially damaged
263.Arokiamatha Amathipuram Parish Arokianagar 8th Mile post Thunnukai Partially damaged
264.St. Joseph’s Church Amathipuram Parish Vannerikulam Thunnukai Partially damaged
265.Sacred Heart Church Amathipuram Parish Anaivilunthan Thunnukai Partially damaged
266.St. Agnes Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Mankulam Thunnukai Fully damaged
267.St. Joseph’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Muthayankaddu Thunnukai Fully damaged
268.St. Mary’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Pandiyankulam Thunnukai Fully damaged
269.Sacred Heart Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Chalampon Thunnukai Partially damaged
270.Sacred Heart Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Selvapuram Thunnukai Partially damaged
271.St. Sebastian’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Mallavi Thunnukai Partially damaged
272.Annai Vellarnkanni Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Vavunikulam Thunnukai Partially damaged
273.St. Antony’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Palaiadi Thunnukai Partially damaged
274.St. Antony’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Unit 2, Mallavi Thunnukai Partially damaged
275.St. Sebastian’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Thennyankulam Thunnukai Partially damaged
276.St. Mary’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Koodaikadudiakulam Thunnukai Partially damaged
277.Sacred Heart Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Kalvilan Thunnukai Partially damaged
278.St. Antony’s Church Mankulam/Mallavi Parish Unit 4 Thunnukai Partially damaged
279.St. Michael’s Church Urumpirai Parish Urumpirai Urumpirai Partially damaged
280.St. Henry’s Church Urumpirai Parish Julanoor Urumpirai Partially damaged
281.St. Peter’s Church Urumpirai Parish Punnalaikadduvan Urumpirai Partially damaged
282.St. Mary’s Church Urumpirai Parish Neerveli Urumpirai Partially damaged
283.St. Sebastian’s Church Kayts Parish Karompon Velanai Minor Repair
284.St. Mary’s Church Kayts Parish Suruvil Velanai Partially damaged
285.St. Anni’s Church Kayts Parish Thanuvil Velanai Partially damaged
286.Our Lady of Vellarnkanni Kayts Parish Karompon Velanai Minor Repair
287.Church of Christ the King Kayts Parish Melinchimunai Velanai Partially damaged
288.Church of Our Lady of Good V Mandaithivu Parish Chaddi Velanai Partially damaged
289.St. Peter’s Church Mandaithivu Parish Mandaithevu Velanai Partially damaged
290.St. John the Baptist Church Mandaithivu Parish Allaipiddy Velanai Partially damaged
291.Our Lady of Mount Carmel Mandaithivu Parish Mandaithevu Velanai Partially damaged
292.St. Philip Neri’s Church Mandaithivu Parish Mankumpan Velanai Partially damaged
293.St. Anthony’s Church Mandaithivu Parish Mankumpan Velanai Partially damaged
294.St. Peter & Paul’s Church Naranthanai Parish Naranthanai South Rd Velanai Partially damaged
295.Sacred Heart Church Naranthanai Parish Naranthanai Velanai Partially damaged
296.Our Lady of Lourdes Naranthanai Parish Naranthanai Velanai Partially damaged
297.Our Lady of Holy Rosary Naranthanai Parish Saravanai Velanai Fully damaged
298.St. Francis Xavier’s Church Naranthanai Parish Punguduthevu Velanai Partially damaged
299.St. Anthony’s Church Naranthanai Parish Naranthanai Velanai Partially damaged
Fully damaged = 93
Partially damaged = 186
Minor Repair = 20
Total = 299
[Submitted by: Dylan Ramsay]
April 10th, 2008
By Col R Hariharan (retd.)
Assassination of Fernandopulle
The assassination of Sri Lanka Highways Minister and Chief Government whip Jeyaraj Fernandopulle (55) by a suicide bomb blast at Gampaha district on Sunday (April 6) morning has deprived the President Rajapaksa of his point’s man in the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). The minister was killed along with 11 others when he was flagging off a marathon race as part of the Sinhala (and Tamil) New Year’s Day celebration at Weliweriya. Over 95 others were injured in the blast.
[Jeyaraj Fernandopulle 1953-2008]
A voluble and assertive personality, the minister had been active in setting up things for the ruling alliance to contest the eastern provincial council elections slated for May 10. The President will be sorely missing his services during the PC election as also in handling the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal (TMVP), which is a loose canon in the political firmament, after the elections.
Fernandopulle had been high on the hit list of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) for his strong anti-LTTE stance. He minced no words against them in his speeches. So it is logical to conclude that his assassination was the handiwork of the LTTE. Even the assassination of D.M.Dasanayake, Minister of Nation Building, carried out on January 9, 2008 is believed to have been a case of mistaken identity as Jeyaraj Fernandopulle was intended to be the target. However, this time the assassin made no such mistake. .
A four-time parliament member Fernandopulle had created an indispensable niche for himself within the SLFP. He was one of the few Tamil ministers who could fluently speak Sinhala and English as well. A no-holds-barred speaker, Fernandopulle was well known for his blunt statements that caused red faces in diplomatic and political circles, and in the corridors of power.
The President is unlikely to let the LTTE get away with the assassination of his right hand man. We can expect him to unleash the security forces in full force once again on the LTTE forward defences in Mannar, Madhu church, Omanthai, Welioya and Muhamalai areas. In any case, the ground indications already point to the imminence of resumption of offensive by the security forces and the LTTE’s readiness to face them. The killing of the minister is likely to only hasten the process.
Operational picture
Abnormally heavy rains had bogged down the operations in the north so far. The troops deployed near large water bodies in Mannar, Muhamalai, Nagarkovil, Welioya areas have been affected by flooding and slush. This had impeded air and artillery support and defences were waterlogged. Mosquitoes breeding in puddles of water have spread dengue and chikungunia among troops. This is reported to have severely affected operational capability of security forces in Welioya sector along the eastern coast.
Despite the rains during the last month, the SLA had claimed some progress in their creeping offensive after inflicting heavy casualties on the LTTE. On March 21, 2008, the Media Centre for National Security spokesman has claimed killing 6,867 LTTE cadres so far in the operations that commenced in December 2005. As against this, the security forces had lost 1,501 troops in action. The casualty claim at end February 2008 stood at a total of 6,486 LTTE cadres, and 1,196 military personnel. These figures could be inflated or include civilian auxiliaries and need to be confirmed by other sources. However, the Media Centre figures indicate a sudden escalation in the security forces casualty – 305 troops killed in the four weeks of March 2008) as against a total of 1196 troops lost in the earlier period of 24 months! Moreover, as against the security forces loss of 305 the LTTE had suffered 386 casualties in the same period. This is an alarmingly low ratio between the two, achieved never before.
This shows the combat along the front line even during the rains had really heated up. And as the operations intensify further now and all the heavy fire power is brought in, casualties on both sides are likely to mount rapidly. But despite this, the security forces are undoubtedly better placed. Considering the overall size of the security forces, their casualties are comparatively much less than that of the LTTE which has been mauled severely (though not grievously), losing at least 30 per cent of its strength..
During the last one week the rains have tapered off and the weather has improved. Thus assured air and heavy artillery support should now be available for operations. Similarly, ground conditions should have improved for the using armour without the fear of getting bogged down in slush. The trickle of civilians vacating the battle zones is growing. For the last few days the security forces were being moved forward in Jaffna Peninsula perhaps to get ready for a fresh offensive. We can expect it to start sooner than later.
The LTTE also appears to be gearing itself for the offensive to resume. Three groups including the Malathi and Charles Anthony brigades have been moved to Madhu Church area in the Mannar Sector, according to deserters. Both sides had agreed to keep the church and its vicinity a no war zone. However both sides have been trading accusations of the other side using the holy ground to launch artillery fire. And fierce fighting had been raging for sometime now within a kilometre vicinity of the church.
The Bishop of Mannar Rayappu Joseph has informed that in order to save the idol of Our Lady of Madhu from artillery fire, the church management had shifted the idol to a safe location on April 4.
It is evident that the idol has been moved to the northern most part of the LTTE held territory at the behest of the LTTE. The escalating the combat situation in the area around Madhu Church is probably operational. The church is located astride the supply routes from Mannar coast to Wanni. So it is vital for the LTTE to defend it fiercely. It is equally important for the security forces to wrest control of the area. So we can expect the LTTE to fight it out when the offensive resumes in this area.
Both sides appear to be preparing for a long haul. Media reports indicate that Sri Lanka had asked Pakistan for the immediate supply of 150,000 rounds of 60 mm mortar bombs and hand grenades. Pakistan is likely to fulfil another Sri Lankan order worth $ 25 million for the supply of 81 mm, 120 mm and 130 mm mortar bombs. The LTTE also appears to have received from some ammunition, particularly for its artillery. It is not clear which clandestine route is being used by the LTTE to import the munitions. But the Indian coastal zone continues to be the weakest link in the naval defence of Sri Lanka. We may expect the Sri Lanka navy to intensify operations in the seas around Katchativu in the coming weeks. This could trigger further tensions in both India and Sri Lanka. This is in the nature of war which always triggers tension in both winners and losers.
(Col R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka as Head of Intelligence. He is associated with the South Asia Analysis Group and the Chennai Centre for China Studies. E-Mail: colhari@yahoo.com)
April 7th, 2008
By D.B.S.Jeyaraj
The Marian church dedicated to our Lady of the Holy Rosary at Marudhamadhu – commonly known as Madhu – in the North – western district of Mannar has provided safety and refuge at different times to thousands of people fleeing the violence of war.
[Our Lady of Madu-Photo Courtesy: Mannaar Diocese]
The benign presence of “Madhu Maadhaa” (Our Lady of Madhu) or “Sebamaalai maadhaa ” (Our Lady of the Rosary) had made church precincts and environs an oasis of refuge and haven of peace in the past.
Yet, in what was perhaps an illustrative indictment of the escalating war, the sacred statue of our lady of Madhu and baby Jesus joined the ranks of those internally displaced by the war in Sri Lanka .
Four Catholic priests Fr.S. Emilianuspillai,Fr. A. Gnanapragasam,Fr. E. Sebamalai and Fr. T. Sahayanathan arrived in a white coloured motor vehicle at the premises of St. Xaviers Church in Thevanpitty on Thursday April 3rd.
They brought with them the sacred statue from the Church in Madhu. It is unclear at present whether the statue will be kept indefinitely at St. Xaviers Church or taken to another safer place in the near future.
As for now the internally displaced “Maadhaa” statue will remain at the church in Thevanpittty .
Thevanpitty adjoins Mulangaavil along the Mannar – Pooneryn road. Technically Mulangaavil falls under Kilinochchi district though it is on the border of Mannar district.
A large number of displaced Tamil Catholics from Mannar district have sought refuge in Mulangaavil and adjacent areas. Now the Marian deity herself has been compelled to follow in the footsteps of her followers and join the fellowship of the displaced.
[Pictures from Mannar Diocese Photo Gallery]
The on going war between the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) and Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has pervaded and invaded almost all aspects of life in the North – Eastern regions of the Island.
The war has escalated and intensified after President Mahinda Rajapakse was elected with the help of an enforced boycott by the tigers.
In this climate of war the Catholic Bishop of Mannar Most. Rev. Rayappu Joseph has been trying very hard to safeguard and protect the Madhu church from harm.
The Bishop has made repeated requests to both the GOSL and LTTE that Madhu area be declared a zone of peace.
There is very little “military” value in Madhu. It is politically significant.
The security forces can easily by- pass Madhu and progress forward. If that happens the LTTE will have to move out.
Instead of that the forces zeroing in on Madhu.
It is believed that the forces are trying to take Madhu simply because President Rajapakse wants it.
When he was Prime Minister Rajapakse wanted to go to Madhu with his wife who is a catholic.
The LTTE imposed unacceptable conditions and the visit did not take place.
During his presidential election campaign Rajapakse harped on this and “complained” that despite being premier he could not visit all parts of the Country.
The question of Madhu came up during President Rajapakse’s trip to the Vatican.There were specific requests that the Government engage in peace talks and that Madhu not be endangered.
But Colombo was determined to push ahead with war.
Madhu was regarded as a prize target. There are plans to “capture” it and derive political mileage by facilitating pilgrimages of Southern catholics there.
The LTTE is equally determined to resist these military advances as much as it can.
Thus Bishop Rayappu’s plea to officially declare Madhu as a peace zone has fallen on deaf ears.
The Madhu church has been in a beleaguered state for a long time. Still it managed to provide refuge and succour to thousands of internally displaced persons.
[Pictures from Mannar Diocese Photo Gallery]
When the year 2007 dawned there were more than 10, 000 IDP’s in Chuch environs.That number began dwindling drastically due to a number of reasons including brutal LTTE pressure tactics and escalation of war.
By the end of March 2007 the number had reduced by half with about 5,000 people being forced to evacuate by the LTTE during the last week of March.
This process continued and by December last year the IDP population in Madhu had come down to about 1500.
The new year of 2008 saw further decline in numbers. When March 2008 began the number was about 700. When March 2008 ended it was just about 200 people from 36 families.
April saw the last of the remaining IDP’s also leave Madhu. The clergy and laity serving the church also began leaving.
A skeleton “staff” of four priests, four nuns and five civilian employees remained to oversee the evacuation. Many valuables and important documents of the Church were taken out.
On Wednesday April 2nd all communication to the Madhu church and office ceased as military hostilities intensified. Finally on Thursday April 3rd there was a lull.
Utilising that interlude the remaining thirteen left Madhu amidst tears and prayers. They took along with them the sacred statue of Mother Mary. Our Lady of Madhu had left her abode.
Later on the senior priest in charge of Madhu church Rev. Fr, S. Emilianuspillai and three other priests reached the St. Xaviers Church in Thevanpitty/ Mulangaavil.
[Pictures from Mannar Diocese Photo Gallery]
It was indeed a sad moment to listen to the voice of Bishop Rayappu as he stated sorrowfully over the BBC Tamil service “Thamilosai” that the statue was being re- located and that our Lady of Madhu had become a refugee in her own land.
It was for Bishop Rayappu Joseph a personal tragedy as the much misunderstood and much – maligned prelate had struggled very hard to stave off this disaster.
But now like Job of the old testament” the thing that he had greatly feared had come upon him”.
Bishop Rayappu had tried hard in the past to preserve and maintain the sanctity of Madhu . He wanted to avoid military action that would damage the church.
From former LTTE political Commissar Suppiah Paramu Thamilselvan to President Mahinda Rajapakse and sibling defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse, Bishop Rayappu had made several appeals.
There was a tacit agreement that the Church premises and precincts including the 70 acre pilgrim camping area would be strictly a no – war zone.
There was also agreement that the surrounding area of a one – mile radius would be kept free of military activity by either side.
It was an unofficial arrangement.
The weakness in this arrangement was that capturing Madhu church remained a military objective while its outer areas were an unofficial “no – war zone”.
Though Madhu had remained a military objective for more than a year the unofficial “no – war” agreement had been honoured for many months by both sides.
Initially the LTTE had established its defences to the South of Madhu much ahead of the unofficial no war zone.
The security forces in the meantime inched forward slowly towards Madhu. A major reason – if not the only one – for this progress was the exceptional care taken to refrain from causing damage to the Church or its environs.
The military strategy was to surround the Madhu area and interdict supplies to fighting LTTE cadres. This would compel the LTTE to withdraw and melt away from Madhu.
Thereafter the security forces could take Madhu without causing damage to the Church.
The 57 division commanded by Maj – Gen Jagath Dias has been engaged in a three – pronged offensive operation to “seize ” Madhu.
The 57 – 1 is at a point near Palampitty;the 57 – 3 is at Vilaathykulam; 57 – 2 is at Periyapandivirichaan and Sinnapandivirichaan in the South of Madhu.
Despite the stiff resistance put up by the LTTE it was widely believed that the security forces with their overwhelming military superiority would at some point overcome opposition and reach their objective.
Slowly but relentlessly the security forces were pushing the tigers back and a hard – pressed LTTE shifted gear.
The unofficial pledge was supposedly broken by the tigers first who allegedly took 81 mm mortars “back” to the outlying areas of Madhu church and fired at the army.
This apparently was a diabolical ruse to provoke retaliatory fire from the army and thereby make the Madhu church precincts vulnerable.
Firing from civilian infested areas and bringing about counter – fire has been a familiar tactic of the LTTE.
Once this happens and innocent civilians are harmed the LTTE propaganda machine goes into action, lamenting about the plight of civilian casualties.
By all accounts the security forces had not taken the bait this time and had refrained from engaging in unfettered counter – fire.
Maj – Gen Dias however complained bitterly to Bishop Rayappu urging him to pressure the LTTE into removing their mortars from church area vicinity.
Bishop Rayappu kept on “requesting” the removal of those mortars but the tigers flatly denied the charge. They had a logical explanation.
Why should the LTTE shift mortars back from their frontline positions?
Also the LTTE had long – range artillery that could fire from longer distances, it was pointed out.
Militarily the LTTE argument made sense but those familiar with tiger tactics recognized the ploy for what it was.
The tigers had shifted mortars “back” not to gain military advantage but political mileage through provocative firing.
After much delay the LTTE removed the disputed mortars from Madhu church “no – war zone” vicinity
Meanwhile troops to the South of Madhu made significant advances into tiger territory.
A major triumph was the overrunning of a three km long trench. Two artillery positions of the LTTE were also destroyed.
This brought the security forces to about 1. 5 – 2 km of the unofficial ” no – war zone”. This happened in March.
By the end of March a new and troubling development took place. An order was issued in Colombo that Madhu should be “taken” by April new year.
The armed forces made a determined military drive from Periya and Sinna pandivirichaan towards Madhu through the Madhu sanctuary jungle terrain.
Even as the security forces intensified military efforts the LTTE also changed tactics. The tigers began setting up positions inside the Madhu church sanctuary jungle areas.
The LTTE also came into the outer precincts of the church. The tigers were not inside the church or church compound but began using the church camping area which technically is classified as church precincts. This is more than 70 acres in extent.
When church authorities objected the LTTE said “Ask the army not to proceed further in this direction. we will go away”.
The security forces in turn insisted that the LTTE move away first with their artillery and mortars
Both sides were intransigient.
Thus Madhu church environs got militarised
Fighting escalated and shells began raining.
Shells began falling inside Madhu church precincts and camping areas for pilgrims. Shells fell on the priests quarters, outer premises of the church, a drinking water well etc.
The church did not suffer a direct hit but window panes cracked due to explosion impact. A barrage of shells landed on the outlying road to Palampitty.
All civilians evacuated. The skeleton staff took refuge in bunkers, popping out during lulls , to engage in evacuation work.
With the LTTE moving into church precincts and the security forces moving forward church authorities realised that Madhu church was going to be directly caught up in fierce fighting.
This prompted them to leave.
Even as Madhu church precincts became increasingly vulnerable, charges and counter – charges began flying.
The LTTE accused the security forces of making war on holy ground and charged that army shells were falling inside church premises. The army denied the charges and pointed the finger at the LTTE.
The tigers were accused of using church premises as a mortar launching pad. These charges in turn were vehemently denied by the LTTE.
Bishop Rayappu made a last – ditch effort to prevent impending disaster and preserve church sanctity and safety.
He issued a public appeal on Tuesday April 1st urging that both sides keep the Church and vicinity as a peace zone.
Full text of the appeal from the Bishop to protect the Shrine of Our Lady of Madhu is as follows:
Apeal to protect the Shrine of Our Lady of Madu from all military presence and operations
The Shrine of Our Lady of Madhu is a much respected and venerated shrine to Catholics all over Sri Lanka. For more than 400 years Catholics and as well as non Catholics have gathered around Our Lady of Madhu as a unique Shrine that has served the spiritual needs of Sri Lankans from different walks of life, different ethnicities, different religions and different areas of the country. For more than two decades, in the midst of the conflict and mass displacement, Madhu Shrine also served as a place of refuge for all affected people. Madhu Shrine has been recognised locally and internationally as a “safe haven” and “place of refuge” for people fleeing in the face of war and destruction.
The Church administration has always maintained the Shrine and the area around purely as a place of religious worship and a place of refuge for displaced people. It was strictly kept out of bounds for any type of military or political activity. In the last few weeks we have been extremely concerned that this sacred Shrine and its functions as a centre of spiritual and humanitarian service has come under severe threat due to the escalation of the ongoing military conflict. Shells are falling within the Church premises several times and many of those staying there have been compelled to leave, while priests and the other church workers who are still remaining, live in fear and are being forced to seek shelter in bunkers.
The Catholic Bishops Conference of Sri Lanka, the Bishop and the priests of Diocese of Mannar have been appealing to the LTTE and the Sri Lankan Army to refrain From using the area gazetted as the Madhu Church Reservation under the “Pilgrimage Ordinance” in 1982 for military and political purposes and to respect its sacred and humanitarian nature. Appeals have been made to the President of Sri Lanka to declare the Madhu Shrine as a “Zone of Peace” through a special gazette notification in order to ensure that the Shrine can continue to serve as a religious and humanitarian space.
Today, as military operations are taking place very close to the Shrine, we are compelled to make an urgent appeal to both the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE to respect the Madhu Shrine and the area mentioned above as a Zone of Peace, keep away from the Shrine areas and to ensure that the area remains completely and solely under the administration of the Church. At this crucially difficult juncture, we appeal to all Catholics, all Sri Lankans, particularly those who have a deep sense of belonging and devotion to Our Lady of Madhu as well as all religious leaders and the International community to join in our efforts to safeguard the sacred and humanitarian character of this very special place of worship.
For this intention, we will hold a special prayer service in Mannar tomorrow, 2nd April stating from 9:30am at the St Sebastian s Cathedral. We Invite all our Catholics and people of goodwill to join in our cry addressed to both the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE to completely desist from using the Madhu Shrine for their military and political purposes.
We also invite all faithful and devotees to fast and pray on Fridays and pray the rosary every Saturday for this purpose and for peace in our dear land.
May our Lady of Madhu, the dear Mother of the people of this land bless our country with peace through politically negotiated settlement.
Consequent to the Bishop’s appeal thousands of catholics gathered on April 2nd at the St. Sebastians Cathedral in Mannar for a special service of worship to pray for our lady of Madhu church. Bishop Rayappu Joseph himself conducted the service.
Thereafter the Bishop along with hundreds of religious dignitaries, and devotees of all religions engaged in a peace march from the cathedral through St. Sebastian and Bazaar streets and reached the District Secretariat located on Mannar Main Street
The Bishop handed over an appeal to Mannaar District Secretaty/Government Agent A. Nicholas Pillai.
Mannaar Bazaar remained shut down, public offices and private businesses did not function for more than 3-hours, during the prayer and procession.
Despite Bishop Rayappu’s fervent efforts, events began to overtake.
The LTTE was setting up defences within close proximity to the Church. At the same time there were indications that the security forces would not practise earlier restraint.
Escalating military activity meant that the church would be in the line of direct fire soon.
In that context damage to the Church was a strong possibility
The greatest treasure of Madhu was the sacred statue of Mary and baby Jesus.
The risk of the statue being damaged was very much there.
Thus the painful decision to re-locate the statue was taken.
Earlier it was planned to bring the statue to St. Sebastans Cathedral in Mannar. But the LTTE objected as it was in GOSL controlled area.
The tigers wanted the statue to be brought to the tiger heartland of Mullaitheevu district.
Church authorities refused. After heated arguments there was a compromise.
So the statue was taken to Thevanpitty along Mulangaavil in LTTE controlled territory.
How long the statue will remain at this temporary abode is a perplexing question.
If the security forces establish full control over Madhu and the Church can resume normal functioning then the statue can be brought back.
But will the LTTE allow it?
On the other hand can the statue remain in safety for long at Thevanpitty?
If and when the security forces push forward along the Mannar – Pooneryn road , Mulangaavil along that route will be affected.
What happens then?
Will the statue be taken further to the interior inside tiger territory?
Meanwhile there would be pressure on Bishop Rayappu that he negotiate with the LTTE and ensure that the statue is brought to GOSL controlled areas.
With contending demands and pressures Bishop Joseph Rayappu will be in an unenviable position.
It has become fashionable in certain circles to blame the Bishop and accuse him unfairly of being a tiger agent.
Only those familiar with the intricacies of the relationship between the Catholic church and the LTTE understand the difficulties involved and the tight – rope walking undertaken.
Few are aware of the numerous incidents of friction between Bishop Rayappu and the LTTE. The Bishop does not publicise these matters due to a sense of greater responsibility and duty.
[at the Madhu Church-pic by Mahesh]
Fr. Emilianuspillai who is the priest in charge of Madhu church has also had many altercations with the LTTE in trying to maintain the independence of the Church at Madhu.
Bishop Rayappu and Fr. Emilianuspillai like all men are fallible and may have compromised or made errors of judgment. But their hearts have always been in the right place and have remained true to their calling and mission.
The Catholic Bishops Conference (CBCSL) issued a statement on Madhu after the statue was taken out.
Here are some excerpts:
“It is with deep sadness we learn that the hallowed and miraculous Statue of Our Lady of Madhu had to be removed from the Shrine due to the escalation of the armed conflict in and around the sacred area.
What alarms us is that the sacred precincts of this particular sanctuary is rapidly becoming the arena of the war and continued military oper tions.
There is every danger that the sanctuary will be devastated in such an armed conflict..
We, the Catholic Bishops, therefore earnestly appeal to the Government and the LTTE to be conscious that the hallowed shrine of Madhu has been and is precious to all communities of our beloved land and thus avoid at any cost making it a zone of the combat and thereby ensure its safety and sanctity. It will hurt the sensibilities of all Catholics and people of good will to see the desecration of this shrine and its destruction.”
Meanwhile Bishop Rayappu Joseph appealed for assistance from the Vatican to resolve the prevailing volatile security situation in the Madhu Church area.
The Bishop informed the Vatican about the ongoing conflict situation in the Madhu Church area between the LTTE and the government forces and requested the Vatican to intervene diplomatically in resolving the matter.
He told a Colombo newspaper that he had informed the Vatican through Apostolic Nuncio Archbishop Mario Zenari.
“I briefed him of the situation and told him to inform the Vatican to do something,” he said. Meanwhile he had also told the LTTE to vacate the church area and the army to reopen the roads. ” the Bishop said.
Bishop Rayappu is desperately seeking an end to the fighting around Madhu and bring back the sacred statue.
The possiblity of this happening is doubtful due to the “prestige” issue surrounding Madhu. One cannot see Colombo or Kilinochchi giving in.
There is an imperative need for the sacred statue to return to its rightful place soon.
There is no doubt that thousands of Catholics are hoping and praying for such a return.
Bishop Rayappu’s request that faithful devotees fast and pray on Fridays and pray the Rosary on Saturdays evokes a sense of poignant irony in this columnist.
Though a protestant Christian I have moved with many devout Catholics and witnessed first – hand their faith and devotion.There is a special place in their hearts for Our Lady of Madhu .
This columnist has been a pilgrim to Madhu during happier times and has worshipped with people of different races and religions at the holy shrine. Madhu has truly been a multi – ethnic , multi – faith magnet.
The legends surrounding Madhu speak of Mother Mary curing snake – bite victims and extending protection from elephant ravages. Many people bring back earth from the sacred soil as a token of blessing
People make pious vows to the Church and observe them strictly. Our Lady of Madhu is specially prayed to by many on Friday prayer – fasts and Saturday Rosary prayers.
Today faithful Cathoilics are being asked by the Bishop to pray for Madhu being preserved as a haven of peace.
Devotees would be praying to our Lady of Madhu who is herself today displaced from her abode.
Tragic!
Humanity cries out for divine intervention at times of sorrow and distress. This is the basis on which religion is perpetuated.
But what does one do when the earthy manifestation of the divine deity to which one prays is herself in distress and is displaced?
Yet the history of our lady of Madhu and the mystique that surrounds her demonstrates that her displacement is only temporary.
The “Maadhaa” will surely return triumphantly to her rightful abode in Marudhamadhu.
If the displacement of the sacred statue is the nadir of war then the return would herald the zenith of peace.
The return of our lady of Madhu could be a harbinger of peace with Justice
Hope springs eternal in the human breast.
Let us hope then that our Lady of Madhu will be restored to her rightful abode soon and that peace prevails with justice in this land .
Related: Madhu Church: Tragic Casualty of Politico-Military Crossfire- by D.B.S. Jeyaraj
April 5th, 2008
by D.B.S. Jeyaraj
The continuing strife between the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has had many unintended consequences.
Chief among them are the numerous victims caught in the politico – military crossfire of a conflict they were never a part of.
The latest casualty in this respect is the Catholic church dedicated to our lady of the Rosary in Marudhamadhu (Madhu) in Mannar district.
Our Lady of Madhu Church is the premier place of Marian worship in Sri Lanka. Until the ethnic conflict escalated it was a magnet drawing all Catholics and even people of other faiths towards it.
Sadly the deepening conflict widened the ethno – linguistic chasm. The Catholic church in Sri Lanka became increasingly divided between Sinhala and Tamil as religious unity crumbled before ethnic identity.
[Road in Madhu-file picture-pic by Mahesh]
Currently a savage war rages around the vicinity of Madhu Church and the sacred statue of Mary and baby Jesus has been taken away to another location for safety.
The LTTE has obstructed plans of taking the sacred statue to St. Sebastians Cathedral in GOSL controlled Mannar.
Instead the statue has been taken to St. Xaviers Church in Thevanpitty in the LTTE controlled area of Mulangaavil.
Arguably there has been a political dimension in Colombo’s military project of acquiring Madhu.
Madhu has political significance far in excess of its military value though sections of the media continue to harp on its “strategic importance” without any concept of the region’s geography.
The hidden factor that increased the importance of Madhu in recent times was the involvement of the first family.
Madhu Church dedicated to Our Lady of the Rosary is called Sebamalai Matha Thevaalayam or Madhu Maatha koyil in Tamil.
[Madhu Rosary Stall-Pic. Courtesy of Mahesh]
President Mahinda Rajapaksa is a devout Buddhist but the First Lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa is an equally devout Catholic.
Shortly before his Presidential election campaign in 2005 Rajapaksa wished to go to the Madhu church with his wife.
Since the Madhu church was in LTTE controlled territory, “permission” was sought from the Tigers for the visit. Rajapaksa was Prime Minister then.
The LTTE laid down the condition that once inside LTTE territory, Rajapaksa should dispense with his security detail and rely only on Tiger escort. This was unacceptable and the idea of a Madhu visit was aborted.
The issue however rankled in Mahinda’s mind. During his election campaign he often referred to the fact that though he was Prime Minister he was not allowed to visit some parts of the country.
After assuming the Presidency one of Rajapaksa’s achievements was his visit to the Vatican with the First Lady and his audience with his Holiness Pope Benedict XVI.
President Rajapakse met with Pope Benedict and the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, as part of a four-day visit to Italy.
The question of Madhu church transpired during the Papal audience. It was discussed in greater detail with Cardinal Tarcio Bertone. It was emphasised then that the church should not come to any harm during the on going war.
President Rajapaksa had to explain that the Madhu church was not under government writ. He gave an assurance that no harm would come either to the church or pilgrims while military operations were in progress.
“In light of the current situation in Sri Lanka, the need to respect human rights and restart the path of dialogue and negotiations was stressed, as the only path to put an end to the violence that has bloodied the island,” a Vatican statement then said.
“The Catholic Church, which offers a significant contribution to the life of the country, will intensify the delicate commitment to form consciences, with the sole aim of favoring the common good, reconciliation and peace,” the statement also added.
Despite the sentiments evinced by Vatican there was no adherence to it in Colombo. The “divided” Catholic church in Sri Lanka did not engage in any significant pro – peace activity in deference to the Vatican
Military activity in Mannar district escalated after the entire eastern province was captured in July last year. A noteworthy aspect of the fighting in Mannar was the ostensible focus on the area surrounding Madhu church.
The military gain in capturing Madhu does not seem to be much but the political and symbolical value is great. Besides members of the First Family, many southern Catholics would love to do a pilgrimage and worship at Madhu.
The Madhu victory was played up during an election campaign in President Kumaratunga’s time. If southern pilgrims are able to visit Madhu safely in large numbers it would no doubt enhance President Rajapaksa’s prestige further.
It is therefore important to understand that the military project to take Madhu is more political than military.
Instead of trying to move into Madhu and endangering the Church the security forces could have by – passed the area and tried to advance further up.
If the security forces had done so successfully the LTTE would have had no option but to abandon the militarily non – important Madhu and withdraw.
Then the security forces could have simply walked in without any damage to Church or civilians.
But this was not done due to a gigantic ego problem where people wanted to “conquer” areas they were not allowed to go in earlier.
Madhu had to be conquered and exhibited as a trophy like Kudumbimalai/Thoppigala.
It had to be thrown open to Southern pilgrims before the northern war was over to derive political mileage.
The security forces to their credit were extremely cautious earlier and took great care to avoid damage to the Church.
Recent events suggest that an element of impatience has entered. Recent firing has not been that cautious.
It is not correct to charge the security forces of an “evil” intention to wilfully damage the church.
If destruction was the motive the forces have the firepower and airpower required to demolish it.
That is not the objective and any damage inflicted can only be accidental and not intentional.
But there seems to be a sudden” hurry” militarily.
This may be due to fresh directives that Madhu should be taken before April new year.
Again political motives are dictating over military considerations.
The security situation however is not likely to imporove after the re- location of the sacred statue from Madhu.
It was perhaps anticipation of further deterioration that compelled church authorities to transport the statue elsewhere.
The tigers have so far remained outside the church and church compound but they are now openly visible in the outer precincts> They are setting up defensive positions in the vicinity.
Increased artillery and mortar fire by both sides is an indicator of the future.
As troops advance the LTTE may entrench themselves on church premises and precincts.
The security forces will be caught in a dilemma as damage and destruction to the Church will be politically damaging.
LTTE political Commissar Balasingham Nadesan has come out strongly against the GOSL on the question of Madhu.
“The Sinhalese armed forces that cause danger to the people has imposed yet another atrocity on them. Once again, the GoSL is striving to transform the sacred area of the Madu Shrine into a war zone.” Nadesan said in a statement.
Expressing concern over escalating military conflict in Madhu and the plight of civilians is a legitimate exercise. But when the LTTE does so it becomes a rank exercise of hypocrisy.
The LTTE is the proverbial “uruthiraatchap poonai ” or sanctimonious cat (or tiger) in this instance.
There was earlier an unofficial agreement that an area of one mile radius around the church be kept free of fighting as a “no war zone”. Both sides adhered to it for many months.
But it was the LTTE which violated this agreement first. Mortars were taken to the Madhu church vicinity (though not into precincts) and fired. Subsequently LTTE positions were established in close proximity to the Church.
The military made many requests to Bishop Joseph Rayappu to prevail upon the LTTE to abide by the assurances. But despite the best efforts of the Bishop the LTTE did not oblige.
It was finally in frustrated agony that church authorites decided to pull out with our Lady of Madhu’s statue. Church leaders realised that the LTTE was going to turn the area into a battle zone.
Against this backdrop Nadesan’s accusation about “transforming sacred Madhu into a war zone” rings hollow and smacks of duplicitous hypocrisy.
That is not all.
The tiger political commissar also laments over the plight of civilians being displaced from Madhu.These are people who were displaced from their homes and sought refuge in Madhu.
The Tiger Political Head termed as “barbaric” the Sinhalese government’s act of making a war zone out of the Madu Shrine that provided refuge to thousands of internally displaced people says the LTTE mouthpiece “Tamilnet”.
Expressing concern over IDP plight is legitimate but such tears are “crocodilean” when the LTTE starts shedding them over IDP’s in Madhu.
Due to escalating military activity more than 10,000 IDP’s of all religions had found shelter at the Madhu church precincts last year.Youths fleeing LTTE conscription also sought refuge in Madhu
The LTTE was not happy. They had set their sights on 1000 – 1500 youths sheltering in Madhu. The predator wanted its prey.
When church authorities prevented it the LTTE turned nasty against the church dignitaries. Several priests were abused and threatened. One priest had to seek protection elsewhere.Even an eminent church leader was reprimanded harshly by low – level tiger cadres.
This is what happened next according to a report ” Conflict-related Internal Displacements In Sri Lanka”, released by the Inter Agency Standing Committee last year.By March 19, 2007 there were 10,197 IDPs seeking shelteri n Madhu
The report details how the IDPs had to leave the compound in the nine days after March 19.
“The LTTE had a tacit agreement with the church authorities that they would not recruit from within the church grounds. However, with over 1000 men and women of ‘fighting age’ amongst the IDPs sheltering at the church the LTTE started to put increasing pressure on the church authorities to allow unarmed, plain clothes LTTE cadres access to the church to speak to the families about recruitment.
[Madhu Church sign announcing festivals]
By the beginning of March, LTTE cadres were entering the church premises on a regular basis for this purpose.
“At the same time, the LTTE announced that it would prevent any more displaced families from entering Madhu Church to seek temporary shelter and that it would ask IDP families currently inside Madhu Church to relocate to alternative displacement sites.
The LTTE also claimed that it could not guarantee the safety of humanitarian agency staff travelling by road to the Madhu Church which meant that humanitarian organisations were unable to access the area.
“On March 23, it was reported that the LTTE had ordered the IDPs to leave Madhu Church and head north towards Vellankulam, allegedly for security reasons. It was also agreed that the LTTE was using the movement of IDPs from the church as a recruitment opportunity.
On the evening of March 23, the LTTE brought trucks to the church and started to force the remaining IDPs to leave.
The LTTE cadres were allegedly armed and they used wooden sticks to force the most reluctant IDPs to get into the trucks. By March 25, more than 5000 IDPs (75% of the IDP population) were forced to leave the church. T
he LTTE cadres told the IDPs that they would be able to return after three days to collect their belongings, but the IDPs were not allowed to do so and their belongings were taken by “thieves”.
The IDPs moved to Andakulam, Adampan and Vaddakandal in LTTE controlled areas of the Mannar District.”
The report said that by March 28 the Tigers stopped all supplies to the church compound and shops in the vicinity were closed. On April 2, they informed the UNHCR that all IDPs had left Madhu Church.
When the UNHCR raised concerns over forced relocation on April 4, the Tigers said “that the Madhu Church area had been under heavy shelling by the Sri Lanka Army and as a result the IDPs had spontaneously and voluntarily fled the area.”
As of end December 2007 only 1, 223 remained in the Madhu division as IDPs, and an additional 208 remained with host families.
However the whole Madhu region has been demarcated as an area where there was ‘no access’ to UN and other agencies and it is very unlikely that detailed reporting of the kind seen last year would take place this year.
This then was how the LTTE treated the IDP population in Madhu and virtually shut down the refugee haven.
Thereafter the LTTE applied further pressure and made the remaining IDP’s also relocate.
The tigers also banned further IDP’s coming ito Madhu.
Nearly 20, 000 people displaced from the Musali , Nanaattaan and Manthai West AGA divisions were forced to move further north into the Mulangaavil – Vellankulam areas at different times instead of seeking refuge in the Madhu church premises
After such inhumane treatment meted out to the pathetic IDP’s in Madhu the very same LTTE is now evincing concern over Madhu refugees.
The “Tamilnet” also says Nadesan ” recalled that in 1999, “invading Sinhalese troops had fired from armoured tanks laying siege to the Madu Shrine and killed more than 30 people, including children, women and the aged, who had sought refuge there.”
The question of who fired the shells at Madhu is something that is yet to be answered conclusively. Both sides accuse each other.
It may be relevant however to quote from Bulletin no 23 of the University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna) about the incident.
This is the same UTHR (J) that is being hailed in the Tamil media for its courageous exposure of those responsible for the AFC employees massacre in Muthur.
This is what the UTHR had to say about the Madhu incident referred to by Nadesan now.-
“We said in our last bulletin that the Church believed that the shells which killed 38 refugees in Madhu in November 1999 had been fired by the LTTE. We now have confirmation that this is widely shared by church officials in Madhu and technically the Army could hardly have fired those shells. We also learn that shortly after the incident, Bishop Joseph Rayappu gave Karikalan, a senior LTTE figure, a dressing down”.
Nadesan also called upon the International Community and Human Rights organizations to come forward to condemn the Sri Lankan government, which according to the LTTE “concerns itself about the mental peace of the Buddhist people and the sancticity of the Buddhist places of worship, but tosses away the peace and holiness related to other people and instead prioritizes only its military interests.”
It is certainly correct that Buddhism has been given foremost place in Sri Lanka but it is disgusting to see the tigers accusing the Govt saying it ” tosses away the peace and holiness related to other people and instead prioritizes only its military interests.”
This is the LTTE talking!
Yes the very same LTTE that attacked the sacred Bo tree in Anuradhapura and drove an explosive laden truck into the Dalada Maligawa in Kandy; the same LTTE which massacred young Buddhist samaneras in Aranthalawa;
This is the same LTTE that killed in cold blood Muslim worshippers in the Mosques of Kattankudi, Eravoor, Sammanthurai and Akkaraippatru;
It is the same LTTE that killed Tamils dubbed as “traitors” in Hindu temple premises and used Hindu and Christian places of worship to conceal weapons or hide themselves.
It was the LTTE that killed a Hindu priest in Santhiweli for doing Pooja during President Rajapakse’s visit to Vaakarai
But now the tigers are accusing the GOSL of “tossing away holiness ” related to other people and ” prioritizing only its military interests”.
One can only cry out “vetkam! vetkakedu! (shame!shameful)
Attempts are also on in pro – tiger media to justify the transporting of the sacred statue to Thevanpitty instead of Mannar.
Only time will tell whether the statue of our Lady of Madhu will be protected or be subjected to greater harm in the future.
What is being overlooked or deliberately distorted is the fact that our Lady of Madhu belongs to all of her devotees regardless of race or region.
The church may have been located in a pre – dominantly Tamil area but the “Maadhaa” is universal and not a parochial deity.
It must also be remembered that but for a quirk of history the sacred statue may have been ensconced in the Kandyan kingdom 400 years ago.
Let me quote from the historical account of Madhu as stated in the official website of the church. Here are the relevant extracts -
“Those who brought Christianity to our shores planted also in our midst the devotion to the Mother of God. The kingdom of Jaffna in the 16th century consisted of the northern peninsula (called Yalpanam in Tamil and in Sinhalese Yalpane) along with the neighbouring is lets, a portion of the adjacent mainland and the sea coast up to the island of Mannar.
The first news the people of this kingdom had of Christianity was from the new converts of the Fishery Coast of India. About the year 1544 the fame of the preaching and the mairacles of St. Francis Xavier induced the Mannarites to sent deputation to the saint to come to them. As he was busy in Travancore at the time, he sent them a priest who bore his name, to instruct and baptize them.
Over 600 men, women and children embraced the faith and most of them sealed with their blood their belief in Jesus Christ The massacre of the new converts was carried out on the orders of Sankily the king of Jaffna.
The new religion that was planted in Mannar and its neighbourhood did not die. In 1583 the number of Christians is said to have been about 43,000 with 26 churches.
One of these churches was situated in Mantai, a village on the mainland and about six miles from Mannar. This church was the original home of the statue of Our Lady of Madhu, which at that time was called Our Lady of Good Health.
The conquest of the Island by the Dutch opened an era of cruel persecution against the Catholics and the faithful of Mantai were forced to consider seriously the desirability of removing the statue of Our Lady of Mantai to a haven of safety.
There were no priests to give them any spiritual support or strength.
With the consent of the people twenty devoted families, in the year 1670, migrated with the statue of Our Lady of Mantai into the Kandyan territory, where they hoped to save the statue from profanation and them selves from persecution.
Under the protection of the Heavenly Mother the little company wandered hither and thither in the thick forest of the Wanni in constant fear of the enemy.
Guided by divine Providence, they reached a hamlet by the side of an ancient tank on the royal Rameswaram-Kandy route, wherethere was a customs house belonging to the Kandyan king.
The hamlet was called Maruthamadhu; and there the Manthai Catholics planted the seed of Catholicism.
In the calm and serene atmosphere of Maruthamadhu the seed grew under Our Lady’s protection, while persecution raged throughout Jaffna Pattanam.
About the same time there was another movement to wards Madhu from the Jaffna Peninsula. To avoid the Dutch persecution about 700 Catholics crossed over to Poonaryn and sought refuge in the Wanni. Having wandered for days in anxiety and fear, they too, as if by a miracle, were led to Maruthamadhu.
What a happy meeting amongst sylvan surroundings! Among the newly arrived Catholics named Helena whose fervent piety and edifying life won for her the title of “Santa Lena” i.e. St. Helena. In the course of time she married the officer who was in charge of the customs house at Madhu and the first little church dedicated to Our Lady of Madhu was built by this pious lady.
For this good act the Christians have immortalized her memory by calling the place “Silena-Marutha-Madhu” which to the present day continues to be one of the names of the holy sanctuary. From her sylvan shrine Our Lady of Madhu dispensed liberally her favours spiritual and temporal to her children.”
[Madhu Church-pic by Mahesh]
Let us remember then the history of how Our Lady of Madhu found her abode though the original intention was to take the sacred statue into the Kandyan kingdom.
Of course some of the Waani chieftains of the time were paying tribute to the Kandyan King.
So the reference to Kandyan territory could be those of Wanni fiefdoms under the Kandyan kingdom.
People of faith however would not see this event as a historical twist but simply as manifestation of a divinely defined destiny.
For people of such simple yet strong faith all what is happening now to the sacred statue is part of an ordained fate.
As the bard of Avon said “there is a divinity that shapes our ends , rough-hew them how we will”.
Related: Our Lady of Madhu Joins Fellowship of Internally Displaced-by D.B.S. Jeyaraj
April 5th, 2008
By R.Venugopal
The suspension of Wimal Weerawansa, the JVP ’s public face and most popular leader is an event of immense signficance for the JVP and is fraught with possibility. Although the party is nominally headed by Somawansa Amarasinghe and General Secretary Tilvin Silva, it is Wimal who is the poster boy of the new JVP in its most recent avatar. Weerawansa is the party’s most brilliant orator: revered by the rank and file, and feared by his opponents. Weerawansa is closely associated with the JVP’s recent political transformation towards Sinhala nationalism in the post-2000 period, and particularly to the way in which the JVP captured the mantle of Sinhala nationalism in the course of opposition to the CFA and the Norwegian sponsored peace process.
[Wimal Weerawansa]
By the 2002-2003 period, Wimal had become a media sensation. Himself a former journalist, Wimal had for long held the deceptively humble title as the JVP’s media spokesperson. He was an exceptionally skilful performer in front of the camera, as his steely glare, his sharp, clinical style, and his immaculately coiffeured persona has since catapulted him to fame. In the long exile years of Somawansa Amarasinghe through the 1990-2004 period, it was Wimal, together with Tilvin Silva, who were the two top leaders of the JVP on the ground. And of these two, it was Wimal that dominated, at least on the public stage.
From 2003 onwards, Wimal has been the General Secretary of the Patriotic National Movement (PNM), an umbrella organization floated by the JVP at the height of their agitation against the Ranil Wickremasinghe government and the peace process. The PNM was effectively an openly Sinhala nationalist organization, and although it contained a number of leading JVP activists and fellow travellers, it also included a large number of outsiders, such as its Chairman Gunadasa Amarasekera. As head of the PNM, Wimal was presented a new platform to pursue his fiery Sinhala nationalism with some degree of independence from the organizational discipline and collective decision making of the JVP.
Tensions within the JVP have always existed, but have been skilfully kept away from the media eye due to the party’s culture of silence and discipline. There were a number of splits in the party in the 1993-96 period, mostly in the context of party reorganization and consolidation. In the aftermath of the party’s shattering defeat at the hands of the Premadasa government’s counter-terrorism in the 1989-90 period, the fragmented and leader-less remnants of the party naturally gravitated in different directions. While it was ultimately the Somawansa Amarasinghe faction, headed in exile from Paris, that gained control of the party brand name and held a national convention in 1995, there were at that point as many as five separate organizations calling themselves the JVP.
But what has been remarkable about the JVP, which went through a similar period of splintering in the post-1977 period, is that it has prevailed and steadily grown in size and significance. Tens of thousands have entered and exited the ranks of the JVP, but the party has survived. The JVP went from almost complete annihilation in 1990 to winning 1 MP in 1994; 10 MPs in 2000, 16 in 2001, and 39 in 2004. The JVP commands a steady 10%-20% of the Sinhalese vote, and has when contesting under the UPFA, attracted very high levels of preference votes compared to their SLFP colleagues. Much of the JVP’s present image and strength derives from their successful campaign against the peace process and the CFA – a campaign that caused them to mend fences with their old antagonist Mahinda Rajapakse, and to work energetically for his election as president in November 2005.
For the first year after the election, the JVP remained close supporters of Rajapakse, and were assumed to be the power behind his presidency. In actual fact, tensions between the JVP and Rajapakse always remained acute behind the façade of unity, and the JVP refused to actually join his government and re-assume the ministerial positions they had briefly accepted in April 2004. In the first half of 2006, the JVP impatiently goaded Rajapakse to an ever more radical, extreme and militarist stance against the LTTE and indeed achieved that objective. In the early days of fighting in mid-2006, Weerawansa was on several occasions deployed on speech tours of the troops on the front-lines, with his growing influence causing alarm even within Rajapakse’s own party.
But at the same time, while the JVP appeared to be at the peak of their powers in the midst of the military crisis of Maavil Aaru, Muttur, and Sampur in July-August 2006, the party continued to press the government for further extreme measures outlined in the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ election manifesto that they had signed up to. As the price for joining the government and consolidating Rajapakse’s chronically weak base of parliamentary support, the JVP put forward a set of ultimatums including the formal abrogation of the CFA, and the removal of the Norwegian monitors. Rajapakse was not averse to these measures – indeed he has since implemented them, but in his own time, and when the military, political and international circumstances suited him. At that time, Rajapakse and many in his party were deeply unsettled at the JVP’s perpetual brinkmanship, and their uncompromising and confrontational style. A partnership in government with the JVP looked increasingly unappealing, and Rajapakse began looking elsewhere for parliamentary support.
Between late-2006 and early 2007, Rajapakse successfully finessed an extremely complicated political manoeuvre that finally won him the pliable parliamentary majority that he had sought. He simultaneously rid himself of the petulant JVP, won over a sizeable faction of defectors from the ailing UNP, and consolidated his position within his own party by expelling a small faction of opponents from within his own party led by former foreign minister Mangala Samaraweera.
As a result, by early 2007, the JVP found themselves in the extremely awkward position of opposing a government which they had helped elect into power, and whose policies they were closely identified with. Since 2002, the JVP had defined itself in terms of its campaign of opposition to the peace process, and to some extent, with opposition to market reforms. By appropriating both these policies, Rajapakse was effectively denying the JVP the political oxygen and the opportunity for populist fervour that had sustained them for over a decade.
Rajapakse’s primary political agenda item was the war against the LTTE. As long as the war remained successful, and appeared to be prosecuted aggressively, the JVP would struggle to find political traction. Not only could the JVP not oppose the war, but they could not even (as they had done under Chandrika in the late-1990s, or JR in the mid-1980s) complain that the war was not being pursued with enough determination. Life has been tough for the JVP under Rajapakse – for most of the past year, they have had to make do with the slim pickings yielded by issues such as corruption, the cost of living, or government wastage. Even here, the JVP has desisted from exerting their presence, for example by using their considerable union muscle. Indeed, the JVP has held back their unions from any serious strike action for fear that it would be seen as disrupting the economy and the war effort.
Rajapakse has also been an extremely skilful political manipulator, and has constantly out-manoeuvred the JVP by appropriating key elements of their agenda, and denying them an issue to fight him with. In 2007, Rajapakse produced groans of disappointment both within Sri Lanka and internationally with his primitive and clearly unacceptable proposals for power devolution. But this, and much else, has been done with a clear eye to the JVP, which has threatened to oppose and campaign against any meaningful proposals at power devolution – just as they did in August 2000 at former President Kumaratunga’s devolution bill.
To some extent, Rajapakse’s actions amount to a back-handed ideo-political victory for the JVP. Their entry into parliament since 2000 has effectively resulted in the elevation of their agenda into state policy. It has reversed the grand political tide towards greater acceptance of devolution that has been in motion since at least the Chandrika years. Negotiations with the LTTE are now completely off the agenda, as is any incremental devolution. The government has an actively hostile approach to the western donors, NGOs, and to absolutely any measure of the humanitarian intervention and human rights agenda. Similarly, Rajapakse has also not undertaken any major privatizations, and most market reforms remain frozen since 2004. All this is largely the handiwork of the JVP. To this extent, they have much cause for self satisfaction. But the ascendance of the JVP’s ideo-political agenda has paradoxically caused deep tensions within the organization itself, with a spate of high profile media reports about dissent at the top.
In 2006, the JVP’s erstwhile Presidential candidate from the 1999 elections, Nandana Gunathilake effectively left the party and spent almost a year in hiding, presumably abroad. There have also been persistent rumours in recent weeks that another MP, Sunil Handunetti was the subject of unusual disciplinary measures including some form of house arrest. The Handunetti affair came to a head, together with the present crisis over Wimal Weerawansa, in the wake of the budget vote in December 2007. A government that loses the vote on the budget must resign immediately – so that much more was at stake than the actual appropriations bill. The opposition parties, which have suffered much under Rajapakse, had gone to great lengths to coordinate amongst each other and to muster defections from the government benches in order to defeat the budget. Given the complex arithmetic of parliamentary support, the survival of the government ultimately came down to the issue of which way the JVP’s 37 MPs would vote.
There were heated debates on this issue within the JVP itself – and it is widely assumed that the sentiment within the party was to vote against. As an opposition party, the JVP was loath to keep the government afloat, but was under heavy pressure from Sinhala nationalist opinion not to cause the collapse of a ‘patriotic’ war-time government. What is interesting to note is that the Sinhala nationalist PNM, headed by Weerawansa, and which sponsors the soldier’s welfare organization, Manel Mel, which lobbied heavily for the JVP to support the government. There was tight secrecy over the JVP’s decision in the run-up to the actual vote, and the final decision was apparently communicated to the JVP MPs themselves only at the very last minute. Eventually, the JVP, which had voted against the budget on its second reading, had under heavy pressure, changed this on the critical third reading to abstaining. It was ultimately the JVP’s mass abstention that helped stem the tide of any latent desertion from the government benches, and helped preserve the government.
What emerged in the aftermath of the budget is that the PNM – the JVP’s own brainchild – has thus come to play an important role in pressuring the JVP to moderate its opposition to the government. This situation has caused embarrassment and irritation within the JVP leadership, and Weerawansa’s own leadership role within the PNM has thus placed him in the hot seat of contention. In the last two weeks, a new controversy over the PNM has placed Weerawansa openly at odds with the JVP’s position on the issue of paramilitary disarmament in the Eastern elections – and it is this issue which caused an unusually open display of rivalry within the JVP’s leadership ranks and precipitated Wimal’s fall.
From the perspective of Somawansa, Tilvin, Lalkantha and the other JVP leadership, Wimal Weerawansa has been cut down to size. They would ideally hope that he slides quietly into the background without a fuss, and without causing any negative vibes within the party – so that he could be rehabilitated and re-groomed for power in the future. But at this early stage, the situation remains fraught with unpredictable possibilities. Wimal is entirely a creation of the JVP, and is indeed the JVP’s poster-boy of an angry young man, so that it is difficult to conceive of him as thriving under any other political brand name. At the same time, his public persona is such that it would be difficult for him to fade from the public limelight. He has a large and loyal following within the party cadres, who must surely be confused by this unusual departure of their larger than life leader. The PNM has not spoken yet – but they must similarly be displeased with what amounts to a manoeuvre by the JVP against their organization. Meanwhile, the dissension within the JVP ranks is cause for grim satisfaction for the Rajapakse brothers, who would only wish for it to deepen and escalate. The ineffectiveness of the UNP as an opposition party has meant that the JVP poses a far more immediate and unpredicatable source of political threat.
Media reports over Weerawansa’s suspension have speculated over the personality clashes within the organization. Weerawansa is alleged to have been lured into the Rajapakse orbit through his friendship with the President’s brother, Basil. Within the JVP, opposition to the government centres around Tilvin Silva and Anura Kumar Dissanayake. The unresolved rumours over Sunil Handunetti’s house arrest, and the intimidation of his wife have scarcely died down. Nandana Gunathilake has added further fuel to fire by alleging that the JVP contains die-hard militants who are plotting for a return to armed struggle. But personalities aside, the problem within the JVP is a result of the party’s overall unease at the strange political circumstances that they find themselves in – and are effectively caught within a problem of their own making.
As a party of recovering revolutionaries, the JVP has relied on the presence of grand external antagonists to pull themselves forward and to tide over internal differences under the force of forward momentum. In the 1994-2000 period, the JVP had much to shout and scream about – they gained from the growing body of disenchanted PA voters who were frustrated with the Kumaratunga government’s privatizations, devolution, corruption, abuse of authority and failed promises such as on abolishing the executive presidency. In the 2001-2005 period, the JVP experienced unprecedented prominence by leading the opposition to the peace process, which they depicted as a grand threat to the nation posed by a grand ensemble of imperialist powers, Tamil terrorists, NGOs, and their local surrogates. But having come this far, the JVP has suddenly since 2005 found itself unable to project and sustain a grand anti-governmental vision on which to rally their cadres and occupy their considerable energies.
In what appears to be a bizarre throwback to their tragic past in the 1980s, the JVP has recently launched a retro anti-India campaign, and has threatened to launch a boycott of Indian products. But if the JVP’s anti-India campaign in the 1980s was tragic, it is this time a rather desperate farce. Wimal Weerawansa’s suspension is the outcome of the party finding itself in an entirely perplexing situation – of having nothing to oppose. As a result, the party’s frustrated energies and fiery revolutionary spirit have turned inward to consume one of its own for want of an outlet.
April 4th, 2008
An Open Letter to Mr. Veerasingham Anandasangaree
By Kusal Perera
I chose to write this essay as an open letter addressing you, after reading the news item “Grave concern over STF pull out from East; TULF” in the online edition of the DM on 22nd March, that quotes you very much on that issue. As a prelude to this essay, let me go on record that I respect you as a Democrat who stands for a politically negotiated settlement of the ” North-East War” though I have my own reservations on how you approach it. Of course, you are now compelled to live with State security I presume, but I would not hold that against you as long as that armed security remains personal and not part of your politics.
[Veerasingham Anandasangaree]
Now we come to the concerns you raise over proposed PC elections in the East. Agreed, it would never be free and fair with Pillayan and his cadres roaming the area, weapons in hand and with tacit government approval. You would therefore agree, the Batticaloa district LG elections were never free and fair despite PAFFREL stamping it so, for reasons they should know. The total process from nominating candidates through election campaigns and then up to the day of voting, Batticaloa was never without armed coercion, was always living with threats on lives and punctured with abductions and killings. None could openly and publicly campaign against the TMVP, although PAFFREL claims TMVP candidates did not carry arms. Why should they ? They had their cadres for the dirty job. Therefore the TMVP was able to pose without arms on elections day, for PAFFREL to certify them as “good boys”. You would also agree to disagree with the type of democracy the President speaks of after Batti LG elections. If that is the democracy the President wants the North to have through these fake elections, let’s pray to God Mr. Sangaree, to please save them from tortured and traumatised life. Death for the North would be far more relieving.
That much and more you are aware of and that is more than good enough reason to register your concerns over PC elections as the DM quoted you saying [quote] “The withdrawal of the STF will do more harm than good. It is a well known fact that there are armed groups in the East creating a fear psychosis among the people. The government’s decision to withdraw the STF without disarming these armed paramilitary groups will definitely affect the conduct of a free and fair election,” [unquote] But let me tell you fair and square Mr. Sangaree, you were too much with the government prior to and during the Batti LG elections silently watching the government tie up with the TMVP, your argument though valid, most unfortunately, your voice wouldn’t be seriously heard. Now that the government had allowed the TMVP to be part of the local governing process while carrying arms, the TMVP and the government would argue they cannot be disarmed, for they need security to run the Urban Councils and Pradeshiya Sabhas as elected representatives of the people (sic). In the South, that would be a sound argument for the war cry to sustain this government.
Worst is your own dilemma and contradiction in meeting the challenge of armed electioneering in the East. TMVP is the “armed group(s)” you refrain from naming but say would ‘definitely affect the conduct of a free and fair election’. You are no doubt right on that even without names. Yet the reason(s) why the TMVP live with arms is no different to the reason(s) why those armed groups that you coalesce with, carry arms. The PLOTE and the EPRLF (Pathmanabha) have not laid down arms either, as you know quite well. They are very much ‘para military’ as the TMVP. Mr. Siddharthan being in parliament once before, does not
metamorphose his PLOTE into any democratic form. Your alliance with these two para military groups will not be any different to the PA –TMVP alliance.
How on earth can you “contest the polls on a common list” with the armed PLOTE and the EPRLF (Pathmanaba) “for the purpose of preventing the East from falling into the grip of an armed group”? Your presence with two armed groups would only have the people of East living through nightmares with bitterly opposed and competing armed groups wanting to silence each other during elections to win at any cost. Win to be heir to the Chief Minister’s post.
The issue of PC elections for the East, Mr. Sangaree, does not restrict itself to the issue of ‘how free and fair’ it would be, although like every one else you are also trying to hype that issue as the only major issue. It raises a more fundamental issue from the side of Tamil politics that you wish to ignore right now. Where do you stand on the de-merger of the two provinces ? The very argument of those who took recourse to legal action in asking for the “de-merger” of the North – East province was that there is no “Tamil homeland” in Sri Lanka. The de-merger was the call of certain parties in the government’s Sinhala extremism to which your friends in the government most willingly subscribed to. It was therefore a plain bifurcation of the “Tamil homeland” that all of you accepted as a cardinal principle at Thimpu.
To date, neither you nor other Tamil groups including EPDP have publicly dissociated yourselves from that joint “Thimpu Declaration” made in July 1985. The Tamil Delegation at Thimpu discussions consisted of representatives from the LTTE, EPRLF, TELO, EROS, PLOTE and your own TULF. The LTTE, EPRLF, TELO and EROS were also constituent members of the then ENLF. All of them together signed the Joint Declaration at the conclusion of Phase I of Thimpu discussions, which very clearly said [quote] “It is our considered view that any meaningful solution to the Tamil national question must be based on the following four cardinal principles” [unquote] and of the four, the last one being no more valid, the first three remain as [quote]
* recognition of the Tamils of Ceylon as a nation
* recognition of the existence of an identified homeland for the Tamils in Ceylon
* recognition of the right of self determination of the Tamil nation [unquote]
Most signatories (except the LTTE) to this “Joint Thimpu Declaration” including you as the TULF now accept elections to one half of your own “identified homeland” as the de-merged Eastern Province. Accepting PC elections to the East only means an acceptance of the argument put forward by the Sinhala extremism in de-merging. Can you therefore explain where you stand on these “cardinal principles” now ? Do you now disagree and reject the Joint Thimpu Declaration ? You have to answer that single question before deciding to contest PC elections for East.
The moment you accept PC elections to this bifurcated “Tamil homeland” you become a traitor to the Tamil Nation, who voted en-bloc for a “Separate Tamil State” in 1977 responding to your call for a separate State. Remember also, the argument of “a Tamil Nation” can not be defined and accepted without a historically claimed “homeland”. That was reason why Sinhala extremism wanted the North – East de-merged. Now at this point, your acceptance of this de-merged East with the PC elections, negates the “homeland” argument on which the Tamil people could claim nationhood. Thereafter Mr. Sangaree, there is no issue as recognition of the right of self determination of the Tamil nation. There is no reason for power sharing. And no argument as you had made previously for a federal system of governance to accommodate Tamil aspirations.
Again, you are not only accepting East as a separate political constituency, you are accepting the powers vested under the 13th Amendment too. Powers you were adamantly refusing to accept as far less than required for resolving long felt Tamil grievances. With all that you also subscribe now to the argument that Eastern Tamils have a different ethnic right and has to be liberated from the hegemony of Northern Tamils, as Karuna Amman argued after his break with the LTTE. In fact and in plain language, you are now contradicting the fundamental basis of the whole Tamil struggle in which I thought you represent that part which is democratic.
Where are you heading to now in the dust of your political career and in whose political caravan ? You are apparently travelling in a government bus that has a very conspicuous sticker in Sinhala that says “This is Gauthama Buddha’s Land”. Your little faint note asking for Tamil rights therefore go unheeded and without credibility. And, I am sorry about that.
April 3rd, 2008
By MSM Ayub
Almost all major political parties in the country are currently making a fuss of the Eastern Provincial Council election scheduled to be held next month. Frantic efforts are on in making, breaking and confusing electoral alliances and winning Chief Ministerial post for certain communities. But how much are the people of the province interested in these alliances, positions and after all in this election itself.
The United National Party which boycotted the Local Government election in Batticaloa district citing the security situation, especially the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Puligal (TMVP) or the Pillayan Group, one of the main contestants carrying arms, is now challenging the Mahinda Rajapaksa Government to win the Provincial Council if it can.
And it is said that the TMVP Acting leader Sivanesan Chandrakanthan alias Pillayan is insisting that a Tamil should be the Chief Minister of the province. While the ruling united People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) is contesting in an alliance with the TMVP, the Muslim Ministers of the Government have had talks with the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) to form a Muslim front and win the Chief Minister’s post to a Muslim. Are the people in the province concerned about these things?
People in the North and East do not have pleasant memories of the Provincial Council system in spite of the fact that all Tamil political parties and armed groups except the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam (LTTE) clamoured for it and perhaps genuinely believed that it would solve their problems when it was first introduced. They along with the leftists except the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) aspiringly thought that once the system was implemented and people were benefited by it, even the LTTE would be compelled to accept it once and for all.
But history created an altogether different scenario where the LTTE itself turned to be the main stumbling block for the implementation of the Provincial Council system and it successfully turned not only the Tamil people but also those Tamil parties that sacrificed the lives of their leaders and thousands of members for the system, against it.
The LTTE was so hell bent to sabotage the Provincial Council system and Varadhraja Perumal’s North Eastern Provincial Council that they went back on their own declared demand for maximum devolution and swayed President Premadasa during the peace talks in 1989-1990 to promulgate laws so that the central government would be able to dissolve the Provincial Councils-a power that was not granted to the President either by the 13th Amendment to the constitution or the original Provincial Council Act.
President Premadasa accordingly brought an Amendment to the Provincial Councils Act in August 1990 even after the LTTE broke the ceasefire and waged an all out war in June 1990.
In a practical sense the amendment was a vain exercise since Chief Minister Perumal and his ‘comrades in arms’ had long left for Orissa with the last batch of Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) and the war with the LTTE had broken out.
The Provincial Council system in the North and the East so far had passed a turbulent period that the people might be afraid of the system. The 16 month administration of the first Provincial Council for the merged North East had been bogged down in various controversies and entangled in a struggle of survival- politically and militarily.
People of the two provinces did not taste any sweet fruit of it but in a way they were harassed and humiliated by the goons of the Province’s ruling Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF) and the Ealam National Democratic Liberation Front (ENDLF) and their guardians, the IPKF.People living out side the North and the East who supported the concept of devolution of power were also disturbed by events that took place in March 1990 which was taken by most people as Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) by Chief Minister Perumal.
In point of fact, it is a misconception that Varadharaja Perumal declared Tamil Eelam. What he did on March 1, 1990 was to convene a special meeting of the North Eastern Provincial Council and announce an ultimatum to the Premadasa Government for the fulfillment of 19 demands that his party, EPRLF had put forward or face declaration of Eelam on March 1 1991, the following year. It was not UDI, but giving notice to that effect.
By then the Premadasa Government had started peace talks with the LTTE which wanted the Government to dissolve the Provincial Council led by Perumal. And in the meantime they were butchering members of EPRLF and ENDLF while the Government was turning a blind eye. Also by that time withdrawal of IPKF under whose protection Perumal ran his Provincial Council was fast reaching completion with the insistence of President Premadasa pressured by the LTTE.
In addition to this context under which Perumal gave notice for the UDI an important fact that most people ignore is that it was the lion flag that was flying on the council building in Trincomalee when he was making this controversial announcement.
The irony of the scenario was that Perumal himself later on some occasions was under the impression that he had declared independence and not given notice to that effect. When the then Minister of State for Defence Ranjan Wijeratne threatened in his own style to arrest the Chief Minister, Perumal retorted with this writer ‘how can he arrest a ruler of another country?’ and it was carried in the Tamil daily Dinapathi.
Thus the institution of the North Eastern Provincial Council and its short but tumultuous history might be a painful reminder for the people of those two provinces. Furthermore the rulers of the Provincial Council and the members of the ruling party could not win the hearts and minds of the people.
It was said that some teenaged EPRLF members who ran some of the affairs of the Provincial Council sometimes rudely treated the administrative service officers. And the notoriety of the IPKF which was responsible for the security of the provinces added insult to injury. Some question as to whether the LTTE would have gone against the provincial council system or Varadharaja Perumal would have resorted to such a dangerous and controversial endeavour, had the Provincial Council system been fully implemented with powers on police and land granted to the periphery.
This is again being countered with the contention that police and land powers cannot be devolved while secessionist armed groups are in action. This goes on as an endless argument like the one as to whether it is the egg or the hen that came first. The fear that the constitutional powers on the subjects of police and land might strengthen the hands of secessionist forces in the North and East has prevented so far five Presidents- from JR Jayawardene to Mahinda Rajapaksa- from signing the gazette notification on the institution of the provincial police division and the land commission that have been stipulated in the 13th Amendment to the constitution.
Although Chandrika Kumarathunge insisted that the police powers be vested in the Provincial Councils when she was the Chief Minister of the Western Provincial Council in 1993/94, she too did not sign the relevant gazette notification following her ascendance to the Presidency of the country in November 1994.
The JVP has now enlivened the controversy of granting powers to the Provincial Councils while armed secessionist groups are roaming around, objecting not only the Government’s move to implement the 13th Amendment to the constitution in full but also the very concept of devolution. They claim that it will strengthen the objectives of the secessionist LTTE.
But devolved powers and the armed power are going to be married under the very nose of those opposed to granting of police powers to the provincial councils in the event of TMVP coming to power in the Eastern Province. It is sensible for the JVP parliamentary group leader Wimal Weerawansa to argue that disarming of the Pillayan group is tantamount to sacrificing them to the LTTE.
But if Pillayan or one of his comrades becomes the all powerful Chief Minister of the eastern Province he will have at his disposal not a police contingent which comes under the command of the Inspector General of Police (IGP), but an armed force of his own which is legally not bound to take orders from any of the commanders of the three armed forces or the IGP.
April 2nd, 2008
Next Posts
Previous Posts