Sumanthiran, ITAK leadership vote and political realities
By Veeragathy Thanabalasingham
Jaffna District parliamentarian Mathiaparanam Abraham Sumanthiran appears to have done some soul-searching about his defeat in the election for the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) leadership. At least that is what one surmises when listening to his interview with R. Sivarajaha, editor of Thamilan daily on the YouTube channel ‘Neetrikkan’.
He candidly shared details of the General Council meeting in Trincomalee on January 27 and the controversy surrounding the selection process for office bearers, including the general secretary. And when questioned about the fierce opposition to him within the party, despite his long years of dedicated service, he agreed no one could dispute his service to the party but attributed the opposition to his approach not reflecting the feelings of the Tamil people in resolving core issues affecting the community. He then went on to highlight the constraints he faced in openly expressing certain sentiments during negotiations with the government and international bodies for a political solution to these issues.
Noting that the position of the Tamil community would certainly have been different if there had been a viable solution to the ethnic problem, and that with no prospect of a political settlement in the foreseeable future, the community may feel they should at least be able to voice their sentiments, he admitted individuals may have harboured concerns that he was not empathetic to their plight and could not convey their emotions. That, he accepted might have been one of the reasons for his defeat.
He expressed the belief that the Tamil community may feel the need to voice their emotions to the South and the global community in a situation where all hope is lost.
Sumanthiran’s acceptance that the community may perceive as him not having done enough for their cause was articulated in comments about how he responded to the southern political party leaders’ disbelief at the outcome of the election. He said, “I retorted that our people see me as a failed politician because there is no solution to our problem and there is no point negotiating with them.”
That is the stark reality, he said, accepting that the Tamil community is desperate to have someone who at least shares their sentiments and conveys them to the broader community, even if the underlying problems remain unsolved. “So they have chosen my fellow Parliamentarian Shritharan.”
He went on to explain that the expected sentiments were not expressed by him and he would not do so in the future to secure positions, as it was not in his nature. However, he said he had also been striving to achieve the same goals that Shritharan is trying to achieve, and that he would fully cooperate with the new leader to continue to do so.
Addressing the controversy surrounding the selection of the party’s office bearers, including the general secretary, he said even outgoing president Mavai Senathirajah had said they were unable to fully adhere to the party’s constitution to address all the issues. He accused the party members of being inclined to act in violation of the constitution, which he said he had defended when challenged in court a few years ago.
He was referring to a case filed in the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka in March 2014 by an individual from Kelaniya, belonging to the majority community. The case alleged that the ITAK was working to divide the country by advocating for a federal system of government. Sumanthiran, a President Council, represented the ITAK.
In the judgement delivered on August 4, 2017, the Supreme Court Bench headed by then-Chief Justice Priyasath Dep and comprised Justices Upali Abeyratne and Anil Gunaratne, ruled that calling for a federal system of government did not violate the Sri Lankan Constitution nor could it be considered as advocating the separation of the country.
There is no gainsaying that it was a landmark ruling in the recent history of Tamil nationalist politics. Sumanthiran’s argument in justifying the ITAK’s constitution was widely regarded as his most valuable contribution to Tamil politics.
In his brief political career, Sumanthiran also faced the tough challenges experienced by all Tamil leaders who tried to find a political solution to the ethnic issue through a constitutional process by engaging in negotiations with successive governments.
We have a history of decades of deceptive policies and approaches adopted by the governments and the polity in Sri Lanka’s south which have isolated moderate Tamil political leaders from their people. Tamil leaders have been unable to demonstrate even the least minimal results during their talks with the governments to justify their engagements and win the trust of the Tamil people.
It was the actions of successive governments that led to the rise of political forces with extremist views among the Tamil people. The government’s failure to address the ethnic problem even 15 years after the civil war ended, is the real reason for the re-emergence of hardline nationalists in politics. It is against this backdrop that one should view Shritharan’s victory and Sumanthiran’s defeat in the ITAK leadership election.
Sumanthiran has now openly admitted that the Tamil community has chosen Shritharan as the leader of the ITAK because they need someone who can forcefully articulate their in the absence of a political will on the part of the government to find a reasonable political solution to the vexed ethnic problem.
Sumanthiran has been consistent in his promise to fully cooperate with the new ITAK leader. Nevertheless, Shritharan’s expressed views since being elected as the leader, clearly indicate the challenge of people like Sumanthiran to cooperate with him and continue the political journey.
Be that as it may, President Ranil Wickremesinghe, who formally opened the new session of Parliament earlier this month, did not utter a single word about the ethnic issue in his policy statement. Tamil people and their politicians are very much disappointed by this.
Since assuming the presidency, Wickremesinghe has delivered the government’s policy statement in Parliament three times. In the two previous statements, he mentioned the need to find a political solution to the problem, but regrettably this time he maintained a strange silence on the issue, most likely because of the upcoming national elections.
It is worth recalling the pledge Wickremesinghe made last year that he would find a solution to the ethnic problem before Sri Lanka’s 75th Anniversary of Independence. But even after 76th Anniversary of Independence, he is reluctant to talk about the issue. There is no doubt this failure will add fuel to the discontent and lead to the further strengthening of hardline nationalist political factions among the Tamil community
– Veeragathy Thanabalasingham is a senior journalist and Consultant Editor, Express Newspapers Ltd
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.