In Nedunkeni, a small town outside Vavuniya, an ancient Hindu monument consecrated to Lord Siva stood on Vedukkunaari hill. The monument was reported stolen and later its destroyed remnants were found in the surrounding shrubbery. Fingers pointed at possible culprits ranging from the Department of Archaeology to ultra nationalist factions. The temple site, which has been under the Department of Archaeology’s control since late 2018, has been a source of contention with disputes over claims to the land adding to the tensions between the Sinhala and Tamil communities.
Designated as an archaeological reserve in 1933 the site known as Kurundi Viharaya to Buddhists and Kurunthoor Malai to Hindus remained inaccessible to archaeologists and devotees until the end of the war. In November 2020, officials from the Department of Archaeology began re-establishing old boundaries after 87 years. The exploration revealed archaeological evidence that the living quarters for monks’ complex extended beyond the original boundaries. With the controversy about whether the site is a Buddhist or Hindu religious site, it has become the newest manifestation of the Sinhala-Tamil issue.
These are just two examples of similar incidents that are regularly happening in the north and east of the country. The root causes of Sri Lanka’s 26 year civil war have yet to be addressed resulting in exacerbating land conflicts and contestation related to places of religious worship. These disputes are intertwined with issues of ownership, control and access, which have been persistent drivers of conflict in these areas.
The identification of certain sites as Sinhala Buddhist sacred sites has fuelled fears among minorities that their lands and religious practices are under threat. In the post-war period, there has been a notable rise in the establishment of new Buddhist sites in these regions, often on lands that are contested. Local communities have reported that their private lands are being taken over by Buddhist clergy with little to no action taken by the authorities to address these concerns.
While Sri Lanka’s constitution ensures that all citizens have a right to practice their religion freely, it also gives foremost place to Buddhism. “Once we give that foremost place we have already created a situation for people with vested interests to weaponise that position,” said film maker Sulochana Peiris, whose documentary entitled Incensed: Sri Lanka’s Buddhist Supremacy and Minority Communities addressing religious conflicts is now being screened. Sulochana spoke to Groundviews on why she decided to make the documentary, the challenges she faced and her hopes for change with the new government.
What motivated you to make the documentary?
The motivation came because I have been working on these questions from different aspects. In 2021 I compiled a guidebook for journalists on religious pluralism. That got me thinking that although we are talking about religious pluralism, we have had anti-Muslim violence and religiously motivated violence against the Christians and Hindus as well as land grabs and denial of the right and the space to worship. I wanted to connect these issues to the larger picture national picture: why is it happening, why is the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) being weaponised, what is our constitution actually saying about freedom of religion for all communities and how is Buddhism being given the status the foremost place for Buddhism and how is this infringing on the right to freedom of other minority communities. I needed to bring all these concerns together so we can understand where the problematic areas are and what we can do to address them.
What are the challenges you faced in researching, filming and interviewing?
Because I am a Buddhist and I came from that privileged position, it opened up spaces that would not have been accessible otherwise. I asked a Buddhist monk him directly what do he thought about Buddhism being given the foremost place. If it was a minority community journalist, I don’t know how the question would have been received. I had no difficulty in going to places such as Kataragama and the Dalada Maligawa to talk about coexistence and communities coming together to engage in common religious rituals. However, several minority community people, even after they gave the interviews, told me not to use them. I had Muslim women who spoke to me in Kattankudy and then, due to family pressures or their own fear, told me not to use the interviews. I spoke to Christian pastors who had faced violence in their places of worship who didn’t want the interviews used. When I started doing this documentary, we were under a different political climate. I didn’t even want to talk about it and had to whisper about it to people. But there were also people talking about how they want relationships to be patched up and how they want to live in peace. There was a man who had lost his brother to violence but spoke to me about peace and coexistence and the need to talk about it as opposed to his family’s tragic situation.
Are there external forces triggering religious violence?
At the recent elections no one talked about religious differences and politicising ethnicity and religion. Buddhist supremacy it is not what our constitution is advocating but by giving it the foremost place, we have already created a situation for people with vested interests to weaponise that position, which is what is happening now. Political parties, religious leaders and political leaders can rely on it to use it for their own advantage. The real issue is our constitution. Are we a secular country? Several generations down the line people will decide. Right now I don’t see this being a reality. We have politicised people’s religions and ethnic identities and it is not easy to undo the damage.
What did you observe about the polarisation in communities you visited?
It depends on the context. In Digana, for instance, people came from outside the area and created the conflict but in Galle the priest said his place of worship had come under attack multiple times by Buddhist monks and the Sinhalese in the area who were suspicious of their prayers. The Hindus also face problems where religion has been turned into a complete political saga. There are cases of state institutions such as the Department of Archaeology weaponising some of the provisions in the constitution as well as other laws such as the ICPPR to deny or restrict people’s right to freedom of religion or belief with the blessings of the government of the day. People have become more aware since the aragalaya so it is not easy for politicians to use ethno-religious identity for political advantage. If it happens, it is counteracted on social media. Activists and young people quickly defuse the situation. People are fighting back. Minorities themselves speaking up and some youth and activists from the majority community are speaking up on behalf of minorities.
What do you want your documentary to achieve?
I really want to create a discussion around all the questions I have brought up from the constitution downwards. Certain laws limit people’s right to religion and freedom of belief, particularly of the minority communities. That’s the kind of reflection and introspection that I would like people come up with. The root causes for conflicts need to be explored so that Muslims won’t face the violence and dehumanisation that we saw in Aluthgama and Digana. We have seen what happens when there is some incident such as the Easter attacks. There are outstanding issues after the war. Tamils feel restricted and persecuted. They can’t access some kovils because the military is occupying certain lands. Militarisation is an issue infringing on their right to freedom of religion. Hardline, politicised Buddhist monks are in cahoots with politicians.
Are you hopeful of more religious freedom under the new government?
I am trying to think positively. The NPP did not condone the practice of weaponising ethno-religious identity during the election campaigns, so that’s a good start. I hope that people like us will have the freedom to talk about these matters and connect them to the larger constitutional issues we have. That’s the government I am hoping the NPP will actually be if they are really interested in changing the system. However their statements on the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act and the Prevention of Terrorism Act gives me an uneasy feeling. Do we really need to consult men religious leaders when talking about women’s issues? They say the PTA is not going to be revoked but changed. We can’t have that. So I am tempering my positive outlook because of these statements.