This Conference of All Parties is the last opportunity we have of working out an acceptable solution to the problems confronting the people of the Island. 

I do not propose to go into distant history to justify any position that I may be taking. 

It suffices to say that from the dawn of history the Sinhalese and Tamils have been living in this country, have been sharing power, have been engaged in war to oust each other from power and have also ruled over separate parts of the country for several centuries. 

These facts distilled from millennia of recorded history cannot be disputed by anyone. We are all today here to solve problems that have, been created by the imperialist rulers. 

At the time the European conquerors first arrived in the Island in 1505, there were three separate kingdoms. The Portugese subjugated two of the kingdoms, one by succession, and the other by waging war. The Dutch took over the territories conquered by the Portugese and the British in turn took them over in 1796. Having subjugated the kingdom of Kandy in 1815. the British unified the entire administration for their convenience in 1 833. They introduced English education which resulted in the emergence of an English educated elitist class which cut across barriers, of race, religion or caste. 

With some measure of responsible government passing into the hands of Sinhalese under the Donoughmore Reforms further conflicts surfaced. These were no doubt encouraged by the imperialist rulers for their own purposes, but the Tamil Youth under the leadership of the Jaffna Youth Congress boycotted the first election to the State Council in 1931 and demanded full independence. lam mentioning this to show that inspite of differences among their leaders, the Tamil Youth even at that time were inspired by ideals of anti-imperialist struggle for the freedom of the whole country. 

The formation of the Pan-Sinhala Board of Ministers in 1936 kindled fears in the minds of all minorities and they banded themselves under the leadership of Mr. G.G. Ponnambalam demanding balanced representation so that any one community may not be able to dominate the other communities put together. 

This was misrepresented by rabble-rousers and tension between the majority and the minorities developed in the late 30s. 

The British rulers, in the wake of Indian Independence, handed over power to the local capitalist class in return for an agreement to give them the use of the Trincomalee Naval Base and the Katunayake Airbase. The unimaginative Soulbury Constitution that did not take into consideration the heterogeneous nature of the population is responsible for the present plight of the country. Though national parties were formed, within a decade of Independence most of them were forced to adopt communal policies pandering to the lowest instincts of the majority in competition with each other. 

At the time of Independence it was made out that under the Soulbury Constitution out of 95 elected members 42 minority members will be returned. 

Within four years of independence the whole scheme of representation, which involved weightage to the minorities, was totally distorted. The passing of the Citizenship Laws which decitizenised and disfranchised one million Tamil workers and deprived them of the representation they had in Parliament was the first blow directed against the Tamil people. 

It also resulted in the majority Sinhalese people who were 68% of the population at that time capturing 80% of the representation in Parliament. The Citizenship laws also made the totality of the Tamils & Muslims in the country doubtful citizens and they are still undergoing several hardships in registering title deeds for lands, in obtaining passports and other matters, to which hardships the Sinhalese are not subjected.

The introduction of Sinhala as the only Official Language and reduction of Tamil to an inferior position placed the stamp of perpetual inferiority on Tamils and Muslims who spoke the Tamil Language. It also resulted in their being denied equality of opportunity in employment. This law gave rise to the first demand for a separate state. 

The demand for regional autonomy and the safeguarding of the Tamil homelands became imperative in the context of planned and systematic colonisation of parts of the Eastern Province with Sinhalese people which was started in the 50s, Allai & Kantalai schemes in Trincomalee, the Galoya scheme in the present Amparai District and later the Morawewa & Padaviya schemes in Trincomalee are examples of this policy. The colonisation was carried out in violation of the Land Development Ordinance. The Muslims who were the majority in the Galoya development area and the Tamils in Kantalai & Allai and other areas in Trincomalee were made minorities in those areas.

 We listened two days ago to Rev members of the Buddhist clergy speak on the necessity for free movement of people. I want to ask the reverend priests what freedom of movement do the Tamil people have in this country. The only freedom they have is to be moved by ships from refugee camps in the South to the North & East.

Ven Madihe Pannaseela Mahanayakka Thero referred to 276 Buddhist places of worship scattered over the Northern & Eastern Provinces and he said that Buddhist Priests should be settled in each of these places and Buddhist people settled around these temples.

According to the 1921 census the Sinhalese were 3% of the population in the Trincomalee District and 15% of the population in the combined Batticaloa & Amparai Districts. They were less than 4% in the whole Eastern Province. The Priests and others have tried to make out that even the Northern & Eastern Provinces were peopled by Sinhalese several centuries ago. They referred to the presence of Buddhist ruins as proof of this fact. They forget that the whole of Tamil Nadu and the majority of the Tamil people were Buddhists in the 3rd & 4th centuries AD. The well known Tamil epic Manimekalai and several other Tamil Literary works of this period bear ample testimony to this fact.

We wanted to safeguard our rights while preserving the unity of the country and we agitated by peaceful, non-violent means for the achievement of these objectives. The answer we got was rioting, burning and killing of Tamils. A Hindu Priest was burnt alive in Panadura in 1958. Hundreds were killed, thousands. were shipped to the North & East as refugees. I am not referring to what happened in 1983. I am yet in 1958.

There were four demands that were put forward on behalf of the Tamil people by the Federal Party in 1956:

1 The introduction of a Federal form of Government.

2. Parity of status for the Tamil Language with Sinhala.

4. The grant of citizenship rights for all Tamils who have made this country their home.

The introduction of the 1972 Constitution removing the safeguards against discriminatory legislation ‘contained in the Soulbury Constitution resulted in all the Tamil Parties getting together and forming the Taniil United Front. We submitted six demands, very modest ones, for inclusion in the constitution. They were not even acknowledged.

The UNP itself in its Election Manifesto in the 1977 Election identified a number of grievances of the Tamil people as having led to their supporting a movement for the creation of a separate state.

In the statement of Government policy made by the President on the 4th August 1977 the UNP Government promised:

“My Government accepts the position that there are numerous problems confronting the Tamil People. The lack of a solution to their problems has led the Tamil People to support even a movement for a separate Tamil State. In the interest of national integration and unity so necessary for the economic development of the whole country the Government. feels that such problems should be solved without lose of time and will take all possible steps to remedy their grievances in such fields as:

1. Education
2. Colonisation
3. Use of the Tamil Language
4. Employment in the Public and Semi-public Corporations.

My government will summon an All Party Conference to resolve these problems and implement its decisions.” 

It cannot be denied that these promises were never kept. The provision in the Constitution regarding the use of Tamil Language has not been implemented upto date. The position of the Tamils in employment in the public and semi-public corporations has deteriorated further. The District Development Councils which were established were never given a chance to function properly by the government. 

The Tamil people have been subjected to repeated racial pogroms in 1977, 1981 & 1983. Each succeeding spate of violence surpasses the previous one in its ferocity and intensity. Under these circumstances can anyone say that the Tamil people or TULF have any reason to go back on the stand they took in 1977? 

The position that the TULF has taken is that although their mandate in the 1977 Elections was for the liberation of the Tamil nation by the establishment of a independent state, if a satisfactory alternative which could meet the legitimate aspirations of the Tamil people and. redress their grievances which gave rise to the demand for a separate state was offered, we would place it before the Party which would take a decision in consonance with the wishes of the Tamil People. 

One has to keep in mind the deep feeling of insecurity and alienation that is felt by the Tamil people after the latest spate of violence in June, July & August 1983 in working out an alternative. 

Rev. Dr. Walpola Rahula in the course of his speech two days ago appealed to me not to ask for Regional Councils, I wish to tell him that we are not asking for Regional Councils. The mandate given by the Tamil people to the TULF is to fight for a separate state. It is upto you, the leaders of the Sinhala people to offer a satisfactory alternative.

As I stated we are prepared to place it before the Party and take a decision in keeping with the wishes of the people who gave us the mandate. We come to participate in this All Party Conference on the basis of the proposals contained in Annexure ‘C’ That does not mean that we accept all the proposals contained in Annexure ‘C’. We feel that they will not meet all our grievances and problems of the day but we can take them as basis for discussion and improvement.

The two overriding questions requiring immediate solution are:

(a) Security of the lives & property of Tamil people; and
(b) The integrity of Tamil terrorities from the days of British rule. The preservation of the integrity of these areas as the homeland of the Tamil people was the basis of the agreements and pacts between the Tamil Leaders and the major Sinhala Parties in 1957, 1960 & 1965. 

Both the 1972 & 1978 Constitutions recognised that the Northern & Eastern Provinces formed part of a linguistic entity for purposes of administration and as the Language of the Courts. 

Preserving the territorial integrity of the Tamil areas is intimately linked to the security of the lives and properties of the Tamil people. After every wave of violence hundreds and thousands of Tamils have returned to these areas and sought permanent settlement there. Historically the northern & eastern provinces have been predominantly populated by Tamil speaking people. In the pre-independence period, the Tamils constituted an absolute majority of every district of the Northern & Eastern Provinces. 

ETHNIC PROBLEMS OF MUSLIMS IN AMPARAI DISTRICT:

I am directed by the Executive Council to place before you? the following unanimous decisions made at the meeting of the All Ceylon Muslim League Amparai District Federation held on. Sunday the 15th instant at Muslim Maha Vidyalaya, Oluvil, for your earnest consideration and effective submission at the Round Table Conference for the settlement of Ethnic Problems in Sri Lanka.

We reiterate the proposals made by the All Ceylon Muslim League and our Federation that Amparai District should be an Independent Unit for the devolution of power.

A. As much as our Muslim brothers in the Sinhala Speaking area have to live peacefully with the Sinhalese, we the Muslims in the Tamil Speaking area have to live peacefully with the Tamils. Ethnic Problems of the Muslims-and Tamils in the Tamil Speaking area with regard to Language of administration, Land, Colonisation Irrigation, Fishing etc., are similar. Solution of these problems will be a solution for both the Tamils and Muslims in the Tamil Speaking area. Therefore, the Muslims in the Taniil Speaking area should extend our fullest, co-operation to the Government and to the Tamils in particular, to find a permanent solution to the Ethnic Problems of the Tamils and in no way the Muslims of the Tamil Speaking area should be a hindrance.

Amparai District is 1,775 square miles in extent. According to the census of 1981, the Sinhalese are eligible for. 37.2% or 660 square miles but they have 76% or 1,340 square miles in the Sinhalese areas. Muslims are eligible for 41.6% or 728 square miles but we have only 263 square miles. In the Muslim- areas which is only 15% of the lands in Amparai District. However, the political Authority of the previous government and the District Minister in the present government are very keen to grab the developed and ready made paddy fields ‘of the Muslims in Muslim areas and settle Sinhalese relatives brought from other districts. These are .the illegal aided settlements of Sinhalese in Muslim areas which is over and above the 38 settlements of Sinhalese under Gal Oya Scheme 1960-63. This manoeuver has very seriously affected the economy and the political strength of the Indigenous Muslim population of Amparai District.

All land taken over from the Muslims by R. V. D. B. Sri Lanka Sugar corporation, and the Tile Factory should be returned to the Muslims with compensation. Muslims can cultivate the sugar cane required for the Factory.

All aided illegal settlements of Sinhalese other than the settlements under Gal Oya Development Project prior to 1963 should be removed out of Amparai District and settled under Mahaweli Settlement elsewhere.” So much for the memorandum ‘of the Amparai District Muslim League,

The Land mass of the Northern & Eastern Province falls entirely in the dry zone and is economically backward. If this fact along with the absence of the infrastructure and the resources of the rest of the country is taken into consideration it would be conceded that the land area involved is not out Of proportion to the population it serves.

The Reverend Priests spoke of the density of population in the various Districts. Why are the northern and eastern provinces barring Jaffna sparsely populated? It is because those areas are backward, undeveloped and have not even adequate water supply.

No prejudice is caused to the Sinhala people by the incorporation of this area into a single region.

Security of the Tamil people even- in the north & east is endangered by the armed forces which act as an army in occupation. Annexure ‘C’ gives power to the Regional Council’ for the maintenance of internal law & order in the region.

Unless the power is made effective there will be no security to the lives & property of the Tamil people even in these areas. One has to remember the words of Mr. Justice Sansoni at page 276 of his report on the violence in 1977. He says: ‘the incidents that occurred also show that there is a cleavage between the Sinhala & Tamil race’. Any solution will have to recognise this fundamental position.

The cleavage is even more complete after the violence of 1981 and irreversible after the latest pogroms in 1983, No amount of plastering can do away with that cleavage. Any realistic solution has to take cognisance of that fact and workout a structure taking the separation of the two in to consideration. I would like to refer to a prophetic statement made by Dr. Colvin R. De Silva in the Course of the debate on the Sinhala Only Act in 1956. He in his characteristic way said: Two Languages one state; one language, two states'. He said this to draw pointed attention to the fact if one language is made the Official Language the group deprived of its Rights, that had a sense of injustice will demand separation. Any solution, unless it is founded on justice and the recognition of the integrity of’ the Tamil Nation and its Territorial integrity will never work.

Before I conclude, I have to refer to the element of violence that has entered the body politic of this country. The outbreak of insurgency in South Ceylon was the precursor to this violence. Tamil Youths who were arrested in the early 70s were locked up with youths from the South who were involved in the insurgency. The violent behaviour of the police armed forces against unarmed Tamil people provoked acts of retaliation by some of the Tamil Youths. When nine innocent people were killed by the action of the police at the World Tamil Research Conference in 1974 it was regarded as a challenge to the Tamil manhood. 

Even as the Jallian Wallah Bagh massacre in Punjab gave rise to the emergence of the militant youth movement. The arrest and intense torture of youths led to retaliatory attacks against police officers responsible for this torture, events escalated in this way till we have reached the present difficult situation. 

It has to be mentioned that in the whole of this violence in the Tamil areas not one Sinhala civilian was harmed or killed. What happened in the South is just the opposite.

The answer to this is not torture by the armed forces against youths suspected of involvement in violence and against innocent people. This will only lead to more and more youths joining the ranks of the militants. Even recently, there had been serious crimes committed by the Armed Forces in areas like Vavuniya against Tamil people. What chance is there of identification and punishment of these men? The removal of these armed forces who are acting as an army of occupation in the Tamil areas is absolutely necessary. 

As Your Excellency remarked in your statement in Annexure ‘A-4’ -(1) if these proposals are implemented one may expect violent activity or support for it to whither away. There is no other way of putting a stop to violence. I have no time to deal with the various points that emerged from the speeches of the Rev Priests and others, some of my colleagues will deal with them. In conclusion I will only say whether the country is going to be plunged in further violence or not; whether the country is going to preserve its unity or not; whether the country is going to progress economically or not depends on the outcome of the deliberations of the Conference and I would appeal to all to work out a solution on the basis of justice and fair play.