Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka on history of power-sharing in Sri Lanka and the 13th Amendment
The Centre for Policy Alternatives recently launched Power-sharing in Sri Lanka: Constitutional and Political Documents 1926 – 2008, a compendium of important constitutional proposals and political ideas that have featured in debates about power-sharing and the constitutional form of the Sri Lankan State since before independence to the present.
Invited to critique the tome was Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka, Sri Lanka’s erstwhile representative at the United Nations in Geneva. In his submission, Dayan pointed out that,
“in a poly-ethnic mosaic such as Sri Lanka, the most realistic thing to do, is to go for the activation of what is already in our constitution, the 13th Amendment. I fear another ten, fifteen years going round and round the Mulberry bush talking to the TNA or on internal self-determination whilst things change on the ground in a very different way. This is where I stand on the issue of power-sharing.”
Speaking of three models of power-sharing – accommodation, assimilation and domination, Dayan went on to note,
“I speak of the Chechen model, that some Liberals shudder about, where there is a full on military defeat of separatist terrorism followed by limited but very real autonomy, and the rule of the liberated areas, through local representatives and partners. Cynics may say proxies.The other model is assimilation on the basis of equal citizenship, which means that the State has to be reconstituted so that no single community – ethnic, religious or linguistic – has built in privilege. The third model is of occupation, of internal colonisation, and domination and hegemony. Not only is this morally and ethically wrong, I believe it is diplomatically unsustainable and I believe it is unrealistic.”
For a related video exclusive to Groundviews and watched, to date, over 87,000 times, see Dayan Jayatilleka: From Geneva to Sri Lanka.
31 Comments
Leave a Reply
Subscribe to Content Updates
iPhone app
Could someone enlighten me about states where no single community — ethnic, tate has to be reconstituted so that no single community – ethnic, religious or linguistic – has built in privilege?
Perhaps, someone could also elaborate on the ‘polyethnicness’ of this ‘poly-ethnic mosaic that Sri Lanka is supposed to be.
Dayan,
Where in your opinion does Sri Lanka stand right now ? In which direction is the wind blowing ? Is it accommodation, assimilation or domination ?
Dayan >>
What’s not clear to me are the seemingly valid counter-arguments that the 13th amendment creates spurious political structures of dubious utility, which will only strain the seams of our already bloated administration. So my question is, are there any administrative benefits to this or is it a device mainly aimed at political appeasement?
Another issue I’d like your comments on is the following. I’ve heard this argument being repeated quite often by certain anti-devolution elements, and there does seem to be some intellectual validity to the claim.
To paraphrase:
Over 60% of Tamils reside in Southern areas, interspersed with the Sinhalese. So how does any form of devolution provide equality to any of these people when they still live in areas where they are under the so-called “Sinhala-Buddhist hegemony”? Should they uproot themselves and move to an area where they become a numerical majority in order to enjoy the missing equality provided through devolution? If not, what purpose does devolution serve? Is it merely a tool for political appeasement of the power-hungry (and/or separatist elements) or aimed at a real change in the status quo of the underprivileged masses?
After helping MR brothers with their “Mahinda Chinthanayas” to succeed at the Geneva meetings , it will take some time and effort for Dayan to reintegrate himself into the Colombo academic community, the CPA and the NPC. I wish Dayan to retreat into himself for a litle while and rethink his vision for the future.
Some folks I simply shan’t debate again, because their elders jump into the ring!
Dear Fr Emmanuel,
I didn’t invite myself as speaker at this gathering nor did I select myself as the opening panellist. With the positive public –actually national — profile I have, (confirmed every time I visit a shop, office or stand on a sidewalk) I really do not have to concern myself with “reintegrating” into the Colombo academic community, let alone the CPA and the NPC (much as I value their contribution). Furthermore, having had my book positively reviewed in the Chatham House journal which Sir Michael Howard says has the best book review section of any scholarly journal in the world, I have no worries about integration into any academic community, let alone Colombo’s where I have always had a large student audience.
With the war having gone the way I argued for and predicted, and with my own role in successfully defending the country’s sovereignty, may I say I am not the one with the problem of re-integration. If anyone needs to retreat into himself, herself or themselves it is those whose strategies and fantasies have utterly failed for decades, ranging from 50:50, through federalism, to secession, secessionist war and most recently, self -immolatory international agitation to stop the war. Here’s something to re-think: Why not self-immolate to free the civilian Tamils from the camps? Aren’t they as deserving of massive demonstrations in the streets of Western cities as the beleagured fascist Tigers and their Rajiv-killing leader Prabhakaran?
Dear Somewhat Disgusted,
Not ” political appeasement” but political management.
The percentage of persons living outside an area they consider their home is irrelevant. Many of us live outside of our ancestral homes, hometowns, home provinces, and even home countries, which does not mean they do not exist or that we have no right to consider them as such.
The Colombo ‘intellectual community’ = CPA and NPC????
on the refusal to debate, dayan….i am assuming you are referring to my father who responded to your crass comment about him jumping to defend me (which is not what he did or, in the very least, NOT the only thing he did), my sense is that you are dodging him just as you dodged me. anyway, i shall take your word (IF you are referring to me) that you will not debate me; a cop-out position on your part and moreover one which paints you into a corner. I suppose that’s a direct result of being too attached to the dialectic frame of logic.
cheers
malinda
perhaps it’s too much to ask, but it would be really nice if more of the presentations at this event were put up.
if the problem is so called Sinhala Buddhist hegemony or the domination by sinhalese, these so called academics are preaching to create separate hegemony for each communities
)) i think we should listen to not so intellectuals 
)
One simple question to all those who talk endlessly about Sinhala Buddhist hegemony (as if that were a bad thing): do you dare to similarly question Anglo Saxon hegemony in Britain, or white supremacy in the United States, or Viking hegemony in your beloved Scandinavian countries? If not, just shut up and put up. You always have the choice to pack up and leave too.
Susan Goon:
I think something is wrong with history. After all, Budhha must have been a violent person, that in the country of birth he never took root and in the country that is living in violence and blood that he has rooted himself. The actions hardly can be reassuring that he could have been a man of peace. Coming from such a streak, you come by as no surprise.
Gamini Seneviratne gratuitously jumped into a debate which had not mentioned him even once! He did so after its conclusion, and in doing so, resorted to slander. When an interviewer directly quoted once of his slanders as a question, in an interview with me I replied. To which Mr Seneviratne, who had earlier regaled us with the virtues of his son’s charity towards fellow students, responded not only with quotes from his son’s articles of years ago, but an even longer and more demented diatribe, which of course I ignored. He and I agree on one thing though, as would most of the reading public: He isn’t Mervyn and I am not his son! I have no intention of getting into exchanges with extended families, members of which have a pathetic habit of praising and quoting each other.
amendment: nuclear families for now, but on present form it could well be extended families next time around…!
when tamils are suffering in iDP camps with very little facilities..pundits are talking about power devolution..
i think Mr dayan should go to tamil nadu and implement the 13 th amendment there..
I say Dayan have a go at Hollywood. His political career is clearly over, now that nepotism & war will allow for Southern buffoons from the village to reign another 100 years. On the other hand, anything is possible in the movies. Mel Gibson was Jesus, Madonna was a virgin, Tom Cruise got married only once…
The thirteenth amendment is an important as it invites the prospect of freedom into the lives of the crushed Tamil people.
The president has promised to fix the current state; however with 300,000 people are still detained and this has not yet happened.
Dayan >>
Thank you for being one of the few public officials to engage with fellow citizens in a public forum and having the courage to be in the direct line of fire of the assorted zealots skulking in these forums while frothing at the mouth.
Regarding your answer, you said “political management”, but does the 13th provide real empowerment to the people at a grassroots level or is it to acknowledge ancestral homes/ethnic divisions? Is it to “contain” the current situation then?
If so, my concern is, is that the correct foundation for moving towards the notion of a plural society as our modern day notions of morality dictate? Are we not, directly or indirectly cementing ethnic divisions constitutionally? Will this not increase ethnic polarization by legally demarcating ethnic regions? Are you endorsing this because the political reality in our country requires it?
Don’t get me wrong. I understand the logic in recognizing the equal status of all citizens and taking steps to provide their cultures with parity of status. But the question is how we move from where we are right now to the plural society we would like to see, where ethnic identities are not the determinant, but national identity? Can you outline your vision for the future? I would like your viewpoint from a philosphical perspective as well as a perspective based on ground realities. I understand that whatever ideals we may want to reach, they do have to be tempered by the realities which confront us, but do humour me.
Cheers!
SomewhatDisgusted:
Building a fair and plural society is what SL sorely needs. The sense of triumphalism and the democracy of the majority version of events should be discarded and buried. If a Tamil can and does reside in Colombo, so can a Sinhalese should be able to reside in Jaffna or Killinochi without any fear. All races should join hands to develop the country. I think and believe that the people will have no problem with this, but will the politicians, across the divide, ever allow this?
The most fair , equitable and lating soulution could only be the constitutional parity of all ethnic group with parity of all national languages and cultures.
Devolution and decentralisation of administration should be the means to empower grassroots with real powers such as education,healthcare/social services,law enforecement ,land and resource management with fiscal responsibility.This should be symmetrical and should be for all provinces.
If this is done with adding a second chamber constituting equal respresentation from all province and making the constutiion secular with equal treatment of all religions,languages and cultures ,the root cause will be addressed and problem can solved once and for all.
Now does the SL intellectuals have the charisma, the guts and the foresightedness to educate the politicians and masses about the merits of this approach to solve the ethnic problem will determine peace and prosperity or conflicts and stagnation in the years to come.
Here is the link to a previous response to a simillar discussion http://www.groundviews.org/2009/08/15/a-critique-of-sri-lanka-unites-freedom-has-not-made-itself-known/#comment-8196
Thanks Dayan for the clarification. Bottom line: You dodged legitimate queries. As for jumping into praise family, extended or otherwise, you are the champion (ref: annual appreciations of your father and frequent quotes). One word: ‘Kashmir’. Any comments? Or will you hide behind that thin curtain, ‘I shall not debate people (whose faces I don’t like)?’
Seems pretty childish to me if you ask.
As for ‘jumping into debates that do not mention one’, i didn’t hear any howls of protests from Geneva when Carlo Fonseka ‘jumped’. Why not? Because he ‘jumped’ on your behalf, Dayan?
What I can’t understand is how CPA and Sara- a supposed liberal outfit that stood the opposite camps to DJ king Dayan in all what he did in Geneva, now invites him to comment on their new contribution to the power sharing debate? Dayan had mocked and opposed all of the proposals (from the CBK package to PTOM) except for his love for this 13th amendment which is dead meat for the last 20 odd years.
Is CPA buying currency for an intellectual lacuna from a notorious political Bandit (some think he is a Pundit) or this is Sanjana’s blind ‘guru bakthi’
giving Dayan’s talk a prominence with the footnote comment for another interview that was watched 87,000 times all seems little too propagandist and self serving
King Duttagamini’s malarkey is symptomatic of those who have nothing to say, yet insist of vomiting drivel anyway.
Dayan’s sustained and long-standing engagement with the readership of Groundviews is detailed here.
That his video was watched over 87,000 times is a fact and perhaps an indication of Dayan’s influence, even if you only read, watch or hear him to vehemently disagree.
Thanks Dayan, the best ever clarrification.
I agree with you from that day on. I believe a vast majority of srilanken interellectuals in all levels back you in terms of 13A. All others´views, like the ones – Susantha, Heshan – minority in this forum, can only help the nation further to be divided.
The only long-term sustainable solution is federalism. CBK and Ranil had given this possibility consideration, but convincing the Southern electorate was (and still is) a major obstacle. I am sure, though, that from an intellectual standpoint, Dayan J. agrees that it would work – that it is sustainable and has far more potential than the lackluster 13th Amendment. Plus he has resided in Switzerland, the second oldest federal state, and comparable in size to Sri Lanka.
Dear Dayan,
“In sum, the young Bandaranaike pointed out the dysfunctional asymmetry between the “base” or “substructure”, the underlying social formation of the island with its poly-ethnic mosaic, and a centralized political “superstructure”.”
You have forgotten something- young Bandaranaike in the 1920s was not seeking a “political solution” for the Tamils but for the Kandyan nationalists who were screaming that they were separate from the rest of the island. The Tamils at that stage were not demanding devolution of power but rather privileged representation in the legislature.
The real “political solution” is not devolution, 13th Amendment (plus or minus) etc. but rather closing the chapter of 1956 by implementing the language policy and making Tamil equal to Sinhala in actuality. The pre-war grievance that Tamils dominated university admissions and govt employment is no longer valid today and the SL Tamils are now a relatively underprivileged people. Efforts should be made to increase their proportion in the civil service.
If Tamil and Sinhala languages are equal then there will be no need for devolution/division of the state and the resultant drop in governance.
Malinda Seneviratne in “The devolution debate and fudging the core issues” published in the Daily Mirror today takes this discussion further – http://www.dailymirror.lk/DM_BLOG/Sections/frmNewsDetailView.aspx?ARTID=61476
It i s worrying to see two intelectuals taking pot shots at each dragging their families in it as well. I thought this type of debating the person rather than their views was limited to our parliament , where anything goes . Can we play the ball than go for the person.! ?
“Why not self-immolate to free the civilian Tamils from the camps? Aren’t they as deserving of massive demonstrations in the streets of Western cities as the beleagured fascist Tigers and their Rajiv-killing leader Prabhakaran?”
If there is a truly DEMOCRATIC government that represents the Sri Lankans and NOT the “Sri Lankan Sinhalese”, then there will not be any “detainees” in any “camps” in Sri Lanka.
Mr. Dayan is well aware of the “freedoms” the “Sri Lankans” have in Sri Lanka
“Aren’t they as deserving of massive demonstrations in the streets of Western cities”. The moment such demonstrations starts in any of the Western countries, Mr.Dayan might be requested by his “masters” to label these demonstrations as organised by the LTTE to regroup itself and it will not be a surprise if Mr.Dayan obliges without bashing an eyelid in the name of duty.
“If Tamil and Sinhala languages are equal then there will be no need for devolution/division of the state and the resultant drop in governance.”. I agree with Mr. Wijayapala with a small change to read as follows “If Tamils and Muslims are treated as EQUALS with the Sinhalese and are not ill-treated or discriminated in any way then there will be no need for devolution/division of the country and the resultant drop in good governance”
If there is a just government in Sri Lanka that treats all its inhabitants in a just manner with good governance as its aim, then Sri Lanka will become a “Paradise’
For those like susie of goon, who might like to compare her (or his) desired Sinhala Buddhist hegemony with what happens abroad, I’ll address the trollish “factual” claim
> “do you dare to similarly question Anglo Saxon hegemony in Britain, or white supremacy in the United States, or Viking hegemony in your beloved Scandinavian countries?”
What hegemony? In Britain the Prime Minister is not Anglo Saxon – he’s from Scotland. They also have MPs and ministers of Asian extraction – and a black Archbishop. In the US, those white supremacists just elected a black President. And it’s been a long time since horned-helmetted marauders sailed out from Scandinavia to terrorise the neighbouring peoples. They are more likely to be involved in peacamaking – though it doesn’t seem to get them a lot of thanks!
In all of those countries there is a commitment to pluralism and equal rights. There is legislation to guarantee a free press – which works. There is a government which is not run by one or two families. And when they complain about white vans they are only talking about inconsiderate drivers.
Where does Susan Goon think they should improve, to be more like her ideal?
Doh! I’ll forget my own name next.
Underground, indeed!
Pardon my ignorance and for coming into this discussion 22 years too late. I finally managed to get my hands on the text of the 13th amendment and I have been labouring through it. What I have read so far is intriguing. I pose a few questions here so that those who are familiar with the 13th Amendment may clarify that I am in fact reading the correct text:
1. The President appoints the provincial Governors (who serve “during the pleasure of the President” – whatever that means).
2. The Governors can dissolve the provincial council
3. The Provincial budget has to have the “assent” of the Governor.
Am I missing something here or what? How does this governance structure change anything other than further consolidating the power of the President? Whether the President rules the provinces directly or through his/her proxy doesn’t really make a difference does it?
We have now a historic opportunity to finally address what we haven’t been able to since the end of colonialism – that is to fundamentally change the relationship between the state and its people. Instead we come up with an amendment that consolidates the powers of the Viceroy under the title of a President.
Ethnicity is actually irrelevant in this discussion as the proposed 13 amendment is a plain and simple lousy piece of legislature. It is equally bad for all ethnicities. I am amazed that this was actually put on the table as a proposal for addressing the grievances of the Tamil community and now I understand why many Tamil people reject this.
I am really not sure why Mr. Dayan Jayatilaka champions the 13th amendment given its blatant inability to provide any sort of real power sharing between centre and periphery (no matter what ethnicity you belong to). The argument that it is already part of the constitution and therefore should be implemented is merely compounding one error after another. At this point, in my humble opinion, we should be having a profound discussion on the entire Constitution itself, pushing for what Mr. Jayatilaka talks about himself – that no section of society should have “special privileges” built into the constitution.
The position that it is not the right time to contest the Sinhala-Buddhist chauvinist elements for changing the Constitution is weak kneed and laying the foundation for the next quarter century of civil strife in our country.