Comments on: Seeking a Solution: 13th Amendment + or 2000 +

By: Appuchamy

Appuchamy — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:13:12 +0000

For critics to say that UNP “stated that it would withdraw from a federal type solution to a unitary solution that would be based on the 13th Amendment to the Second Republic Constitution.” seems to me as a wrong intepreation of the Special Statement by the UNP.

The words ‘federal’ and ‘unitary’ do not appear even once in this statement. ‘United’ appears twice when the statement speaks of United National Party! We should not fight to have tags, but to have substance. I believe the UNP statement has given substance clearly.

Why not be optimistic and look at the good of the repositoned status and build a formula for peace on it?

Appuchamy

By: Aliya

Aliya — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:03:48 +0000

We of course do not need to worry about what Mr. the Opposition Leader says- he may be trying hard to hit the Headlines again after his major Thoppigala fairy tale couple of months back- his DNA program is not a big success, I see.
Well, I think hereafter we’ll see less debates about the type of political solution which would end the conflict, don’t you think? Both parties are in kind of an equal footing- both are unitary.
I think Mr. the Opposition Leader did his calculation 100% correct this time and got the answer as UNF = SLFP, so he must have wandered the need to be different being a federalist. There’s no harm in being equal, is there? That’s what most of the Colombo Civil Society people are fighting for.

By: Daya Ariyawathie

Daya Ariyawathie — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 09:42:34 +0000

My point of view is we don’t have to worry about what Mr.Ranil says. He was the person who acted against draft constituion year 2000. My opinion is that UNP try to win the will of majority and has changed its policy on ethno-political question and stated that it would withdraw from a federal type solution to a unitary solution . I support the suggessions made by Mr.Thissa witharana.