Lanka Citizen

Such racism [of Ranil] is inexcusable, even in a young man. It contrasts sadly with the response of his uncle, Bishop Lakshman Wickremesinghe, Chairman of the Civil Rights Movement, who was as critical of the abuses of the Jayewardene government, as he had been of those of the previous Bandaranaike government. In the days when now reawakened Christians like Lalith Kotelawala were silent, perhaps still making the money under Jayewardene’s new economic dispensation that they can now spend so freely, Lakshman Wickremesinghe was a voice of civilized pluralism.

Finally, we should note that he still continues with associates who are tainted by their activities during that time. Gone are Gonawala Sunil, and Kalu Lucky, who led the attack on the houses of Supreme Court judges, shortly after Ranil had signed the register at his wedding. Ranil is now more sophisticated, and he has instead Tilak Marapana, whom he made Minister of Defence, in preference to more able and experienced politicians.

UNDERSTANDING THE PAST
Prof.Rajiva Wijesinha

The papers this Sunday carried various advertisements featuring Lalith Kotelawala, designed evidently to stampede people into voting for Ranil Wickermesinghe at the forthcoming election. The most frightening contains of what seems to be a Tamil youth being tormented, beneath which, next to a smilingly cherubic Kotelawala, is the caption ‘Cast your vote wisely, so that we may not be dragged back to another monstrous war’.

Above the picture is the headline ‘Do those who sow the seeds of racism, wish to take us back to the past?’ The advertisement, along with one featuring a letter from the Archbishop of Colombo – which one hopes was not designed for the use to which Kotelawala has put it – has been placed by a ‘Society for Love and Understanding’.

Ironically, assuming understanding was really intended, the picture was taken during the July 1983 riots by Chandragupta Amarasinghe, who was working at the time for the ‘Aththa’ newspaper. The ‘Aththa’ was in the forefront then of exposing what the government was up to – which led to it being banned when, a week after the riots, the government accused the Communist Party, Vasudeva Nanayakkara’s NLSSP and the JVP of being responsible and proscribed them.

The irony of this was that previously, in his speech on television on July 28th, J R had declared that the riots had occurred because the Sinhalese had been persecuted beyond endurance. Jayewardene’s response therefore to the sufferings of Tamils was that he had been too soft on separatists, so he would now take measures to proscribe any parties that advocated separatism.

However, perhaps because of the further rioting that broke out the next day, the horror expressed internationally, and wiser counsel amongst those of his cabinet who were not associated with Cyril Mathew, the following week the government changed tack. Now, though not actually condemning the riots that their leader had attributed to patriots previously, they attributed them to leftist parties. Though later the proscription on the CP and the NLSSP was lifted, the JVP remained underground. They had evaded arrest, as had Vasudeva, understandably given that twice running prisoners had been massacred in jail. Thus the involvement of the JVP in the democratic process, which they had adhered to since J R released them from prison in 1977, was halted.

Further ironies abound. In those days Ranil Wickremesinghe, whose cause Kotelawala seems to be espousing so anxiously, showed by his pronouncements that he was still on Mathew’s wavelength. Wiser heads such as Premadasa and Athulathmudali had by now rejected the chauvinist approach. However, in an interview given to the ‘Daily News’ in early August, Ranil declared that what had happened in July 1983 to the Tamils was not so bad as what Sinhalese had suffered previously due to the policies of the Bandaranaikes. To quote from the article – ‘The governments of the Bandaranaikes aimed at the areas where Sinhala entrepreneurs operated. During the second and third Bandaranaike regimes, when manufacturing industries were encouraged, the bulk of the licences except for a few exceptions went to non-Sinhala ventures. Compensation was not paid to Sinhala ventures that were nationalised. To make matters worse a capital levy was imposed as was a ceiling on incomes. Enterprising Sinhala entrepreneurs like Upai Wijewardene and Buddy Wettasinghe went abroad to make their mark and returned only after the current UNP government assumed office.’

‘Mr Wickremesinghe opined that the tragedy that had now struck the non-Sinhala trader due to the machinations of an extreme political party as a result of their factories and business places being burnt down, was nothing compared to the tragedy imposed on the Sinhala entrepreneur by the Bandaranaikes since 1956. With capital being provided and know-how and expertise being available, the destroyed establishments could soon recover. The Sinhala businessman was stripped of his wealth, not paid any compensation and was sometimes driven to suicide and insanity.’

Such racism is inexcusable, even in a young man. It contrasts sadly with the response of his uncle, Bishop Lakshman Wickremesinghe, Chairman of the Civil Rights Movement, who was as critical of the abuses of the Jayewardene government, as he had been of those of the previous Bandaranaike government. In the days when now reawakened Christians like Lalith Kotelawala were silent, perhaps still making the money under Jayewardene’s new economic dispensation that they can now spend so freely, Lakshman Wickremesinghe was a voice of civilized pluralism.

In his last pastoral address, he deals also with the issues raised by Ranil, and provides a rebuttal of the excuses that had been proferred for the attacks on Tamils. He criticizes those who thought ‘that the enforced departure of indigenous Tamils from the professions, government services, universities and schools and of Tamils of Indian origin from retail trade and other occupations in South Sri Lanka was justified…. Because they feel that the undue advantage which the indigenous Tamils had in relation to the percentage of the population, and which the Tamils of Indian origin had in the internal trade, especially within the Sinhala areas, were not justified, they are not willing to condemn the methods adopted to get rid of them.’

Bishop Wickremesinghe’s conclusions were firm and forceful – ‘The arguments that have been stated so far point to one basic moral fact. It is that the massive retaliation mainly by the Sinhalese against defenceless Tamils in July 1983 cannot be justified on moral grounds. We must admit this and acknowledge our shame.’

Ranil Wickremesinghe, though Lakshman’s nephew, was incapable of acknowleding error, but rather played down the enormity of what had happened. Of course it is conceivable that he has changed, but Kotelawala’s advertisement, in bringing back the past, without looking at the realities of that past, forces us to think about how history could repeat itself.

And it makes one wonder about the moral perspectives of someone who, well into his thirties, could adopt the Cyril Mathew perspective. It would suggest that Ranil’s acquiescence in Tiger excesses during his Premiership also arose from joining a bandwagon. This does not bode well for the future, given also his recent somersault into populism after the doctrinaire disciplinarianism of his fiscal policies during his last period of government.

Finally, we should note that he still continues with associates who are tainted by their activities during that time. Gone are Gonawala Sunil, and Kalu Lucky, who led the attack on the houses of Supreme Court judges, shortly after Ranil had signed the register at his wedding. Ranil is now more sophisticated, and he has instead Tilak Marapana, whom he made Minister of Defence, in preference to more able and experienced politicians.

It was Marapana who served the government when they were covering up the massacre of Tamils in Welikada on July 25th and also on July 27th. To cite from the article by Rajan Hoole on the event, which is measured but damning -

‘in came Mervyn Wijesinghe, Secretary, Justice, with Mr Tilak Marapone, Deputy Solicitor General, and Mr C R de Silva, Senior State Counc\sel, ‘offering their assistance to this court’. As recorded by Wijewardene. It was hardly the kind of assistance to be rejected. We know how they led the evidence. Why were the counsels who were representing the victims and survivors not called?…..

An incident during the inquest, which began in the evening and lasted through the night until the 27th morning, is revealing. The AJMO, Dr Salgado’s assistant, a Tamil, Dr Balachandra, was taking photographs of the bodies during the post-mortem examinations as was normal. There was alarm among the minor staff that a Tamil was taking photographs for use as propaganda. A jail guard came in alarm and informed DSG Tilak Marapone about it. Marapone telephoned Dr Salgado from the prison to find out what was going on. Salgado assured him that the camera and the film were his, and it was he who had asked Balachandra to photograph the bodies. The proper thing was for Marapone to have informed the Presiding Magistrate if he thought something objectionable was going on. Such overbearing conduct by the Attorney General’s department to the cost of the judiciary is now endemic to our system…..

The Magistrate conducting the inquest should normally have handed over the bodies to the next of kin. That had become awkward or difficult. At this point Detectvie Superintendent Hyde Silva applied for possession of the bodies for disposal under Section 15A of the Gazette Extraordinary of 18th July 1983; Deputy Solicitor General Mr Marapone, presumably representing the Attorney General, said that he had no objection to the request. Magistrate Wijewardene perused the Gazette and agreed that it should be allowed in law. The relevant section, however reserves such authorization for Secretary, Defence, and not the Attorney General…..

The flames from the pyre leapt up against the glimmering dawn, as the dead were turned to ashes. However, unknown to the army officer, those above him, and the highest in authority, the ghosts of these victims were to haunt this land for a generation and more, denying it any prospect of peace.’

Lalith Kotelawala was conspicuously silent in the eighties when the seeds of racism were sown, and watered so assiduously by government action and inaction, at a time when a true Christian like Bishop Lakshman Wickremesinghe gave up his life for democracy and pluralism. It is to be hoped that Bishop Oswald Gomis will remember his great Christian predecessors, and not allow his name to be taken in vain by those who would pervert the past for their own ends.

courtesy Lanka Academic Network.