This (third) version of ‘Yahapalanism’ appears to be Sumanthiran’s baby. That’s Mathiaparanan Abraham Sumanthiran. One might have even said that it’s the TNA’s baby, if one went by a news story where TNA Parliamentarian and Leader of the Illankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) Mavai Senathirajah was reported to have said ‘at present, there is a joint mechanism in place where discussions are held with the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) prior to Cabinet of Ministers decisions being by the Government.’
Sumanthiran has since taken to task the relevant media institution. He clarified thus: ‘The TNA asked that the Government consult with MPs of the area before taking cabinet decisions regarding those areas, and the Government agreed to do so. This is what the Hon. Mavai Senathiraja said. The news report states that he says there is an agreement between the TNA and Government and that no cabinet decisions can be taken without consulting with the TNA! I said that the Tamil areas in the East should also be included in this mechanism of consultation, but the news item says that I said there will be a North East merger!’ We shall return to that claim, shortly.
In any event, it’s good that he clarified for otherwise, it would mean that the TNA is an authority that sits higher than the cabinet when it comes to decision-making, which among other things would make senior TNA parliamentarian R Sampanthan’s claims to the Opposition Leader’s post rather silly.
And yet, he was clearly spearheading the moves to reinstate Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister after he was unceremoniously ousted by President Maithripala Sirisena on October 26, 2018. He called the shots and the calling as well as the shots are captured on camera. Does that make him de-factor Prime Minister? Close, but we cannot make that claim.
One claim that can be made is that Sumanthran is a crafty operator when it comes to constitutional affairs, if one were to paraphrase a laudatory observation by Prof S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole (see ‘Sumanthiran on wise verbal concessions in the art of negotiations’ published in the Colombo Telegraph in September 2018). The admiration is understandable; Hoole was the TNA’s nominee to the Election Commission. They are misplaced because sleight of hand is pernicious and not a mark of wisdom.
The article is a comment on Sumanthiran’s ‘C.W. Thamotharampillai Memorial Lecture on September 18, 2018 but Hoole offers an aside: ‘Privately, Sumanthiran once told me that these problems of negotiation should be approached judiciously without being hung up on words that can be inflammatory. He gave the example of the brilliance in Article 18 of the Constitution. While 18(1) says Sinhalese shall be the official language of Sri Lanka, Article 18(2) brilliantly goes on to subvert it saying that Tamil shall also be an official language. If we had been stuck on objecting to 18(1), Tamils could never have been liberated through 18(2). It is an oxymoron like 18(2) that can make Tamils get powers to take decision on those matters that concern our well-being through participatory governance.’
Hoole reports that someone asked Sumanthiran the following questions: ‘Why do you say that federalism is not required? Why are you taking the party against what the people wanted and voted for?’ He then claims that Sumanthiran’s lecture on ‘The extent of federalism today’ was essentially a denial of the the allegations couched in the questions. Hoole makes the argument that Sumanthiran was being smart (or rather, devious) about it the federalist posturing.
In his response to the fake news item referred to above, Sumanthiran observes the following: ‘[it was] falsely reported that I had stated that with the new Constitution, a separate state would be a possibility. That is completely false, and directly contradictory to what I said! One of the main things I said in that speech was that we should give up the Eelam dream.’
However, Hoole believes that Sumanthiran is ‘hoping for an oxymoron [(like 18(2)]’. He believes that ‘Sumanthiran is gambling on further oxymorons on federalism and the foremost status for Buddhism’ which according to him are necessary ‘to make minorities fell less oppressed and this country more democratic.’ In other words, Hoole is asking the Tamils to understand that Sumanthiran is playing a game, that he’s batting for federalism without using the F-word.
What Hoole seems to have missed is that Sumanthiran has not balked at using the F-word. Here’s what he said at the Parliament debate on the interim report of the Steering Committee of the Constitutional Assembly (as reported in the Daily Mirror on November 2, 2017: We have very clearly stated that Sri Lanka shall be a secular state, and that Sri Lanka must be federation.’
Let’s observe that the Prime Minister has stated that the status of Buddhism (Article 9) will not be amended in any constitutional amendment. Let’s note also that Articles 10 and 14(1)(e) effectively negate Article 9, very much like 18(2) making 18(1) meaningless.
What’s important here is that even as he denies federalism, Sumanthiran affirms it. Why? Well, Hoole gives us the explanation: Sumanthiran has a penchant to be oxymoronic and it is deliberate, not an accident. Hoole is stretching the meaning of the word, but we’ll let that pass — the intention is clear.
In that same speech, Sumanthiran argues for the merger of the Northern and Eastern provinces — so much for his self-righteous posturing on people being mislead with false news! In that speech, following what has become customary in Tamil nationalist rhetoric, insisted on being for ‘a united, undivided country’. Indeed, he said ‘we have gone one step further and said, an indivisible country even in the future.’
So what? Hoole ends his article with the following key observation on which rests the subterfuge of Sumanthiran and his ilk: ‘Words do not matter so long as we get what we need.’
Hoole knows, as Sumanthiran obviously does, that you can throw in words that negate previous wording. Yes, like 18(1) and 18(2). We saw that in the 19th Amendment with respect to the dissolution of Parliament as well and Sumanthiran, interestingly, had a lot to say in the drafting of the 9th, it is reported.
He knows what’s what, Sumanthiran does. He knows he can say one thing and do something else. He knows that it is substance that will count at the end of the day, not rhetoric and not misleading, grey, vague and weak articles in the constitution.
He does het his knickers in a twist, though. He got them twisted when he said that Buddhists, as per the doctrine, cannot support Article 9, forgetting that as a Christian, following Matthew 5:39, he should not be in politics, arguing for the redressing of perceived grievances through federalism. Maybe he’s actually read the Gospel According Matthew closer than we think, noting perhaps that 10:34 contradicts 5:39 and ‘wise’ about the fact that there’s a lot in the Old Testament to justify horror and the horrific, even terrorism and terrorists (as the TNA did for decades).
In this instance, though, we must take cognizance only of one fact: Sumanthiran is a master at subterfuge, a man absolutely lacking in integrity. He’s a good politician in this sense. He knows what he wants. He has the Prime Minister’s ear or indeed, he is in a position to manipulate the Prime Minister or twist his arm. He is counting on a play with oxymorons delivering federalism in a way that sets the stage for separation later as per the Chelvanayakam Doctrine (‘A little now, more later’), for federalism in essence refers to disparate entities coming together, implying that they can, if so desired, come apart.
Hoole is correct, ‘words do not matter’ if desired outcome is obtained. It is clear what Sumanthiran wants. All the more reason to be wary of his words.
Related articles:
malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawordsblogspot.com
1 comments:
Taken bull by the horn.
Post a Comment