விக்னேஸ்வரன் நியமனத்திற்கு டயான் ஜெயதிலக பாராட்டு

////விக்னேஸ்வரன் சமஷ்டி முறைமையை போற்றும் அதேவேளை எந்த சந்தர்ப்பத்திலும் நாடு பிளவடைய வேண்டுமென வலியுறுத்தவில்லை என அவர் தெரிவித்துள்ளார்.///// I read many times the article by Dayan Jayathilake , I think following is the part this article refereing , If you read the following carefully even racist like Dayan is unable to through any mud on wigneswaran . that is the truth .

when justice Wigneswaran utter the word “self determination” he knows what he is talking about . He does not need to say independent state . This is not about TGTE MP (Mokku Parathesi ) Mani Pad talking about Human Rights law and then saying womens rights must be included .

When sombody utter a word the calibre of the invidual should be play important role while understanding.

Rasist Dayan said the following ,
He is nobody’s “malli”. An interview given to Ayesha Zuhair in 2011 reveals him to be a federalist who stands for the right of self-determination, though he never strays into endorsing secession.

that idiot is misreperesenting Justice Wigneswarans thoughts , in his interview to Justice wigneswaran said the following

“Question: What exactly does the Tamil community want?

Answer:
Simple. The Tamil-speaking people want to look after their affairs themselves. In legal terminology that is the right of self-determination. They want to be governed in the North and East in their language. They want to go back to the land of their forefathers from temporary living quarters provided by whomsoever. They want their security, law and order to be in the hands of their siblings and progeny not in the hands of outsiders.

They want their lands and properties to be administered by themselves; not by outsiders. They want to elect their own representatives without being dictated to by outside agencies, military power or financial power or administrative power. They need to preserve their language, culture, religions and their way of life without outsiders building statues and vihares in their midst with military might. They need to be freed from mercenaries amongst their midst who plunder and rob at the instigation of outside agencies.

All these are not rights which the Tamil speaking people have concocted for themselves. Any people who have certain identities of their own are entitled to ask for self-determination in terms of the international covenants.”

He also calrified the following by saying
“Now tell me Ayesha! Do you think any majority community based Government, with a history such as this, would consent to grant rights to the Tamil speaking people, unless internationally or locally pressured?”
I do not see any possible solution to the ethnic conflict immediately, unless extraneous pressure, inland or foreign, compels the powers that be to relent. This applies to both the government as well as the opposition. Majority community parties are not interested in any solution and want to maintain the supremacy of the majority community through their language and religion.

Except for a handful of persons like Dr. Wickramabahu Karunaratne, Mr.Weliamuna and a few others the majority of Sinhala masses do not want a solution.

Let me explain why I make such a sweeping statement.

Around 1919, the Sinhalese leaders found that unless they made their request for territorial representation unanimously the British were not going to grant their request. So they approached Sir P. Arunachalam, gave him written undertaking that a seat would be reserved for the Tamils in Colombo, and requested him to talk to the Jaffna Association, which preferred communal representation to territorial representation. In the cause of creating a well- knit united Ceylonese polity he was able to get the Jaffna Association to consent to territorial representation. He had implicit trust in the Sinhalese leaders. The request to the Queen was thereafter unanimous and the 1921 Constitution granted their request for territorial representation.

Once the supremacy of the majority community was ensured in the Legislature the Sinhalese leaders Sir James Peiris and E.J.Samarawickreme retracted. A seat for Tamils in Colombo was refused. The reason they gave was significant. Apart from saying that they were not bound by their written promise since they no longer held the offices they earlier held when promising, they also said “You Tamils are yourselves the majority in your two provinces. Why should you have seats in Colombo?”

This meant they recognised the individuality of the Ceylonese Tamil Community who had occupied the two provinces, North and East, from pre-historic times. It was such recognition that made S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike passing out from the Oxford University to recommend a federal constitution for Ceylon. The Tamils did not accept this idea favourably since they were scattered throughout the island while being rooted in the North and East and were doing well.

Thereafter the majority community made use of the whip-hand they had got by virtue of the legal instrument of territorial representation, to discriminate against the minorities especially the Tamils. Under the Donoughmore Constitution the numerical strength of the majority community led to the formation of the Pan Sinhala Cabinet. After the Pan Sinhala Government of the 1930s we see them depriving the franchise of the Up Country Tamils in the 1940s. Then in the 1950s the Sinhala Only Act deprived many Tamils of their government jobs. Early 1970s saw standardisation in education, which deprived many Tamils of their higher education.

Throughout this period the state was colonising areas traditionally Tamil speaking with outsiders without giving first preference to the people of those areas. The demography of the two provinces traditionally Tamil speaking was being calculatedly changed. The 1972 and 1978 Constitutions centralised power in the hands of the majority community. Now there is de facto Army rule in the North and East.

Should there be not civilian over-sight in these areas? Does not democracy mean civilian management of local areas? How long is the military going to stay in the North and East? For ever?

For all this, the Soulbury Constitution of 1947 was secular. It did not indicate a unitary structure. It had an inclusive approach. It recognised the multi-ethnic nature of our society and inserted the all important provision of Section 29. Our 1972 Constitution, which had no mandate to change the 1947 Constitution and no participation from the elected representatives of the Tamils of North and East, got rid of Section 29, giving no akin provision instead, made Buddhism State Religion and approved of the Sinhala Only Act earlier passed thus ushering in officially the supremacy of the majority community.
Having got so far do you mean to say any Government of the majority community would consent to settle the issues of the minorities? They would want the minorities to creep around the stem if they wanted any succour and that too individual favours. Look at our budget. Highest for the military. After the war, is it human security that needs precedence or state security?

What has prevented the State from granting the legitimate expectations of the people of the North and East that they be allowed to look after their affairs undisturbed by outside forces? Root causes which gave rise to violence among the Tamil youth still remain unattended to.

None of the Political Settlements reached with the leaders of the Tamils have been given effect to. Bandaranaike – Chelvanayagam Pact, Dudley Senanayake-Chelvanayagam Pact, Regional Councils’ Legislation under J.R. Jayewardene have been abrogated. The present President, if I remember right in January 2010, gave an assurance to the Prime Minister of India that he would work along the lines of the Thirteenth Amendment plus. The Thirteenth Amendment is a dead letter today.

Now tell me Ayesha! Do you think any majority community based Government, with a history such as this, would consent to grant rights to the Tamil speaking people, unless internationally or locally pressured?

“