நிதி உதவி வழங்க !
UPI ID : enb@axis.com
UPI ID : enb@axis.com
Opposition goes on the offensive as Govt wavers on NCM against SpeakerNPP insists on amendments to the motion, citing ongoing court cases; SJB vows daily attacks in Parliament if no debate is heldPST and POC bills continue to draw widespread criticism from the SJB and international human rights organisationsSJB allies Rishard and Mano unhappy over the party’s statements on the Gnanasara Thera controversyHRCSL report on prison riots says the Prisons Department made flawed operational decisionsIndian High Commissioner meets JVP’s Tilvin Silva to assess the progress of ongoing Indian projects By Our ST Political Desk-01-11-23When opposition parties led by the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) submitted a No-Confidence Motion (NCM) against Parliament Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne on October 9, the ruling National People’s Power (NPP) reacted with the typical bravado of a government with an overwhelming majority in the legislature.House Leader Bimal Rathnayake proclaimed that the government was prepared to hold a debate on the NCM against the Speaker at the earliest possible opportunity, perhaps as early as Parliament’s next sitting week. This level of confidence was to be expected considering the massive two-thirds majority the NPP held in the House. As such, the government, if it chose to back Speaker Wickramaratne, would have little trouble in defeating the NCM against him by a crushing margin.The NPP government’s initially dismissive attitude towards the NCM changed significantly after the 50 charges the opposition had made against the Speaker through the motion became public. The NCM, signed by 44 MPs, including Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa, made several extremely serious misconduct allegations against the Speaker, some of which are the subject of an ongoing probe by the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC).The NCM accuses Speaker Wickramaratne of having deliberately violated the Constitution, the Anti-Corruption Act, the Public Property Act, the Penal Code, the Right to Information Act, the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act, the Code of Conduct for MPs and Standing Orders of Parliament, among other laws and regulations. Some of the more serious charges laid against him through the motion include: That he had illegally requested and obtained a second official residence at Loris Lane, Colombo 04, in addition to the Speaker’s official residence at Rajamalwatta, Battaramulla; that while utilising the second official residence, he had caused the maintenance of the Speaker’s official residence situated at Rajamalwatta, Battaramulla, to be charged to the parliamentary account by appointing an 8-member personal staff, incurring a sum exceeding Rs 760,000 per month for the salaries and allowances of the said staff, as well as expenses for water, electricity bills, and other required goods for the said official residence; that he had removed items of the Speaker’s official residence situated at Rajamalwatta, Battaramulla, including bed sheets, pillowcases, towels, and other equipment from the said residence premises without proper approval; That he had abused his authority and exerted undue influence on parliamentary staff to use other vehicles belonging to Parliament for his personal use other than the two official vehicles he had been assigned, and had obtained fuel for these vehicles in excess of the pre-approved fuel allowances.House Leader Bimal Rathnayake suggests new date for the debate if the opposition amends the NCMThe NCM, which was formally handed over to Parliament Secretary General Kushani Rohanadheera on October 9, was added to Parliament’s Order Book on October 12. The first sign that the government was rethinking its earlier stance on the NCM came during the meeting of the Committee on Parliamentary Business held on October 16, where government representatives on the committee proposed that the NCM be first referred to the Attorney General to check if any of its charges or statements conflict with legal proceedings. According to Chief Opposition Whip and SJB MP Gayantha Karunathilaka, the government’s position had changed yet again when the Committee on Parliamentary Business met on October 23. This time, government representatives told the opposition that referring the matter to the AG was unnecessary. They had claimed certain provisions could be ‘sub judice’, as they referred to legal proceedings, and as such, would also violate the Standing Orders of Parliament. They insisted that the opposition must submit a revised NCM to ensure it is in accordance with the Standing Orders.The Opposition was notified that if it were to resubmit a revised NCM before October 28, it could be taken up for debate at the Parliament sitting scheduled for November 3. MP Karunathilaka says the opposition rejected the government’s request, conveying that the motion was in accordance with Standing Orders and that they were not prepared to amend an NCM to make it agreeable to the government.A media release issued on Tuesday by the Office of the Opposition Leader in Parliament and attributed to MPs from the SJB and the Opposition slammed the move by the Committee on Parliamentary Business to reject the debate on the NCM, calling it “a severe blow to the rights of the Opposition within a democracy.”The statement further claimed that arguments put forward by the government to reject the no-confidence motion are devoid of any logic or fairness. It added that, according to legal experts, the government’s argument that the matters contained in the no-confidence motion are sub-judice is entirely untrue. “Furthermore, another point that undermines the government’s argument regarding the allegations is that their source is based on a parliamentary report titled “Report of the Inquiry into the Leak of Confidential Information Regarding the Speaker,” which was prepared in accordance with a letter sent by the Speaker’s Private Secretary,” the statement stressed.Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa sharing his concerns over the POC Bill at a meeting with foreign diplomats this weekThe MPs stated that in the above circumstance, the position of the Opposition is that it is unethical for the Speaker to continue in that office while the CIABOC is conducting an investigation against him. “The Speaker should step down from his office, at least for the duration of such an investigation. In the absence of such ethical practice, the right of the Opposition is to bring forward such a no-confidence motion.”The political stand-off came to a head during the Parliamentary Business Committee’s meeting on Friday. A media release issued by Parliament’s Department of Communications regarding the meeting stated that in accordance with a decision taken at a previous meeting of the Committee on Parliamentary Business, the opposition had been requested to amend certain provisions of the NCM, in keeping with the Standing Orders of Parliament, and to resubmit the revised motion. “However, as no revised No-Confidence Motion was submitted, it was decided, as previously agreed, that the motion would not be taken up for debate on this day (November 3).” In a separate statement, House Leader Bimal Rathnayake stated it was still possible to debate the NCM before the upcoming Budget 2026 debate if the opposition submitted a revised motion.Unsurprisingly, the decision not to debate the NCM has infuriated the opposition. “Our NCM was formally submitted and accepted. It was even included in Parliament’s Order Book. If the Speaker had any problem with regard to its legality, he should have given a ruling on it before it was included in the Order Book. The fact that there was no such ruling is indicative that the Speaker had no problem with it,” argued Chief Opposition Whip Gayantha Karunathilaka.Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath defended the government’s stance, saying government representatives on Parliament’s Business Committee had clearly pointed out to the opposition that certain provisions of their NCM contained references to the ongoing court case filed by the suspended Deputy Secretary General of Parliament, Chaminda Kularatne, who has challenged his suspension following a disciplinary inquiry ordered by the Speaker. “It was our stance that we should not speak of matters subject to ongoing litigation during an NCM. We only wanted those particular sections removed. We were fine with the rest of the text.”Minister Herath claimed that the opposition had agreed during the Business Committee meeting held prior to the one on Friday to submit a revised NCM, and that was why the debate on the motion had been fixed for November 3. “But they then refused to revise it, leaving the Business Committee no choice but to drop plans to debate the motion.”Chief Opposition Whip Karunathilaka rejected the government’s claim that the opposition had agreed to revise the NCM. “We have been consistent in our stance that the motion does not violate Standing Orders and that once it has been included in the Order Book, it must be taken up for debate.” He also pushed back against the government’s claim that one could not discuss matters subject to ongoing litigation during such a debate. A precedent for such matters has already been set, most recently during the debate on the NCM against then Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena. The debate on that NCM was held over three days and included matters related to several court cases referencing allegations of wrongdoing by the former Speaker, Mr Karunathilaka said.The SJB Parliamentary Group and other opposition parties supporting the NCM are due to meet tomorrow to discuss their next course of action following the move not to debate the NCM against the Speaker. SJB MP Ajith P. Perera, meanwhile, told a press conference on Friday that the opposition would fight to get the debate on the NCM and warned that if the government blocked these efforts, they would have to face the prospect of the opposition bringing up the charges set out in the NCM during ‘every single day’ that Parliament sits.It is difficult to gather what the government ultimately hopes to achieve by obstructing the debate on the NCM from going ahead. It can easily defeat such a motion. The claim that one should not debate matters subject to ongoing litigation remains questionable in light of the fact that it has not stopped NPP MPs from gleefully referring to any and every ongoing court case related to opposition politicians at every possible opportunity during parliamentary debates. Clearly, concerns over matters being ‘sub judice’ come up only when it refers to government members. Even if the debate is not going to be held, the government will find it difficult to stop every opposition MP bringing up the charges against the Speaker listed in the NCM during a normal parliamentary debate. With Parliament set to be busy from this month onwards due to the budget debate, there will no doubt be plenty of opportunities for those from the SJB and others in the opposition to embarrass both the Speaker and the government by repeatedly bringing these matters up.Protests against two billsOne among the many pledges in the ruling NPP election manifesto titled ‘ A Thriving Nation and a Beautiful Country’ was the abolition of all oppressive acts including the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and ensuring civil rights of people in all parts of the country. But going by its actions in power, far from abolishing oppressive legislation, the government is on its way to enacting more seemingly oppressive laws which would make the existing laws look mild in comparison. Chief among the new legislation mooted by the Government are the Prevention of Organised Crime (POC) Bill and the Protection of the State from Terrorism (PST) Bill. The two bills continue to draw strong criticism both locally as well as internationally as the Sri Lanka Police face growing scrutiny in the light of last week’s custodial death of a 29 years old man and the allegations of intimidation of family members of the victim and witnesses linked to the case. With an infamous record of forty-five (45) custodial deaths and thirty (30) encounter deaths between 2020-2025, and a poor record of prosecution of police personnel linked to such cases, there is growing fear that the PST and POC Bills would potentially lead to more abuses.The New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) on Thursday joined a growing number of international organisations to voice concern on the POC Bill warning it risks enabling arbitrary detention, torture, and other rights violations.” The proposed law, alongside the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill submitted on October 6, reproduces abusive provisions in existing counter-terrorism laws that would allow continuing abuses that the government had pledged to end,” HRW said.It said that as the bill would enable prolonged detention without adequate judicial oversight or evidence of criminal conduct, it could encourage torture by allowing convictions based on confessions obtained by the police. “If this law is adopted in its current form, it risks unleashing serious rights violations just as previous similarly draconian legislation has done, HRW’s Asia Director Elaine Pearson said in a statement.Amnesty International also issued a statement on the POC bill this week calling for the bill to be immediately withdrawn.” The POC bill, tabled in Sri Lanka’s parliament on October 6, contains provisions that would make confessions extracted under duress admissible in court, enable the detention of suspects for up to two years without trial, and ban the media from reporting on court proceedings. The bill also confers the police with wide powers to conduct searches without a warrant, and imprison people for not providing information to authorities,” AI said.“This extraordinary bill is the most alarming in a string of repressive laws proposed by the National People’s Power (NPP) government. It reintroduces most of the very worst elements of the PTA and applies them to a wide range of offences,” Smriti Singh, Amnesty International’s South Asia Director said in a statement.Meanwhile, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) reacted to the PST Bill this week by calling on the Government to substantively redraft the bill before enactment stating that the concerns remain regarding broad and insufficiently precise terrorism offences; restrictions affecting protected expression and civic activity; administrative detention and inadequate judicial control; extensive arrest and search powers; executive discretion; safeguards against torture and ill-treatment; due process and fair-trial guarantees; and effective accountability and remedies.The main opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) too has spoken out against the POC Bill with Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa briefing representatives of Colombo-based diplomatic missions and international organisations on concerns over the PST and the POC bill. The meeting was held at the Office of the Leader of the Opposition in Colombo with former ITAK MP M.A. Sumanthiran in attendance to brief the diplomats. Mr Premadasa said legislation to combat terrorism and organised crime was necessary, but stressed that such measures must be accompanied by effective judicial oversight and safeguards to prevent the misuse of executive powers.Twenty-five petitions were filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the PST Bill with petitioners raising concerns over judicial independence, executive powers and potential violations of Fundamental Rights (FR). While the SC has concluded hearing the petitions challenging proposed anti-terrorism bill and its determination sent to the Speaker, several groups and individuals are expected to file petitions in the SC challenging the POC Bill next week.Rift within SJB allianceThe SJB may be heading for problems though on its own with its coalition partners. The rumblings within the SJB came to light when All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader MP Rishad Bathiudeen said at a public meeting a few days back that his party is not a ‘slave’ of the SJB. What has seemingly angered Mr Bathiudeeen was the shift in the position of SJB leader Sajith Premadasa contrary to what he had championed during elections. Though Mr Bathuideen did not elaborate what had angered him, Mr. Premadasa has been outspoken on perceived threats to Buddhism since the matter became a major issue after Ven. Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thera was brought to court in prison attire. Mr Premadasa called for respect for the monastic robes worn by Buddhist monks as well as changes to the relevant laws to ensure that the foremost place given to Buddhism is upheld but given Gnanasara Thera’s contentious role in race relations and particularly his views on Islam, the SJB is on slippery slope on how it champions the cause of the Buddhism while keeping its constituent partners representing minorities happy.SJB General Secretary Ranjith Maddumabandara when queried about Mr Bathuideen’s comments downplayed it stating that there has been no written or spoken intimation by him to the SJB on such concerns.The ACMC leader is not the only alliance partner unhappy with the SJB. Two weeks ago Tamil Progressive Alliance (TPA) Leader MP Mano Ganesan wrote to Mr Premadasa to express his dismay at remarks attributed to senior party member Lakshman Kiriella concerning Tamil and Muslim communities when a SJB-led delegation called on the Mahanayake Thera of the Malwatta Chapter. While welcoming the delegation’s engagement with the Buddhist religious leadership, Mr Ganesan took exception to Kiriella’s reported suggestion that the government was using the issue involving Gnanasara Thera to appease Tamil-speaking citizens and others outside the Sinhala-Buddhist community.Both the ACMC and the TPA are part of the newly formed common political platform of Tamil-speaking political parties which are advocating the rights of their communities, a new headache no doubt for the SJB which has hitherto portrayed itself as a national political party which goes beyond race/religious identities. The challenge for the SJB now is how it will keep its constituent parties from drifting away at a time they seem to be leaning more toward the NPP as the lines between right, left,center-right and center-left parties are blurring and there is no guarantee of bloc votes for any party at future elections.HRCSL report on prison riotsMeanwhile, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) has issued a report this week containing its findings and recommendations concerning the July Negombo Prison riots, which resulted in the deaths of 10 Prison Emergency Response Tactical Force officers and 22 inmates and injured scores of others.The HRCSL said in the report that senior Prisons Department management made flawed operational decisions on July 6 by sending unarmed Emergency Response Tactical Force officers and government assessment staff into highly volatile ward sectors at the Negombo Prison, without a prior risk evaluation or tactical protection which directly contributed to the deaths of 10 officers.It also found that the authorities failed to recognise, isolate and contain the factional disputes that began in Wards Two and Four on the afternoon of July 5, allowing the situation to become a full-scale mutiny overnight. The report added that no prompt legal or disciplinary action was taken against inmate ring-leaders, creating an environment of impunity that encouraged further escalation.Prison officers had fired Type-56 rifles to prevent inmates from breaching the main gate. The authorities maintained that this was done under Section 77 of the Prisons Ordinance, while several inmates alleged direct shooting. Ballistic verification remains pending final judicial medical and post-mortem reports, the HRCSL report said.The HRCSL recommended to the Prisons Commissioner General and the Justice Ministry that the 2018-2020 National Prison Study be implemented in full, in line with the Nelson Mandela Rules. It also called for a joint committee to prepare a road-map for reducing overcrowding, accelerating bail hearings, expanding non-custodial sentencing and ending informal inmate governance.Tilvin-Jha meetingOn Wednesday, a meeting between the Indian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka Santosh Jha, and JVP General Secretary Tilvin Silva, took place at the JVP Head Office in Pelawatte in what was clearly a move to keep the ruling party close to the Indian agenda of its ‘Neighbourhood First’ policy.JVP sources stated during the meeting, detailed discussions were held regarding the progress of joint projects currently being undertaken by India and Sri Lanka. The Indian High Commissioner also briefed the party on the programmes conducted by the Indian High Commission to strengthen relations between Sri Lanka and India. Both parties also exchanged views regarding details of Mr Silva’s recent visit to India following an invitation from the India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).It is no secret that the Indian side has been far from happy over the slow progress of key Indian implemented projects in Sri Lanka. The matter has been brought up both officially and unofficially on multiple occasions. Given Mr Silva’s stature as a powerful non-elected representative of the ruling party, it is not surprising that Delhi may have chosen to relay those concerns to him as well.The Indian High Commissioner’s meeting also comes at a time when the government is struggling to attract Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to Sri Lanka, despite the country’s continuing impressive economic recovery and relative political stability. The US State Department’s recent Investment Climate Statement 2026 on Sri Lanka pointed out that FDI in 2025 in Sri Lanka was a mere USD 1.06 billion, approximately one percent of the country’s GDP, significantly below the three to four percent commonly seen in emerging economies. Sri Lanka’s implementation of foreign investment policies is inconsistent, the report notes. The Board of Investment (BOI) is the principal investment promotion agency, but struggles to function as a ‘one-stop shop’ due to fragmented authority across multiple government departments, creating lengthy approval processes that frustrate potential investors, it has further noted, revealing that investors report challenges in having a consistent and open dialogue with the BOI.“Key impediments include unnecessary regulations, legal uncertainty, and poor bureaucratic responsiveness,” the report states, adding that foreign investors consistently report high transaction costs, unpredictable policies, and opaque procurement procedures.A senior government official with direct knowledge of the problems attracting FDI acknowledged the concerns mentioned in the report. The main reason why Sri Lanka consistently lags behind regional competitors when attracting FDI is down to its own strategic weaknesses, said the source. “Our approval process is notoriously slow because we are still using old methods. The BoI alone will not work. We need a separate authority that would pave the way for quick approvals to be given for investment projects. We may even need to introduce new laws to make this work. Otherwise, we will continue to stagnate,” said the official.He likened the race to attract FDI to a sprint race. “Our competitors are wearing running shoes while we are trying to run in slippers. We can still compete somewhat, but we will never win.”The failure of the BoI to be a ‘one-stop shop’ is a major factor that frustrates investors, said the official. When the BoI receives an FDI proposal, they still have to seek approval from multiple agencies. Even if the BoI gives quick approval, there are many other agencies which still have to sign off on a project, he pointed out. “These agencies will take their own time and some of them show no sense of urgency at all because they either don’t know or don’t care about the value of streamlining their approval processes.”It has also become difficult to attract foreign investors because Sri Lanka continues to remain bound by conditions of the bailout package granted by the Internaitonal Monetary Fund (IMF), the official pointed out. “We can’t provide a lot of incentives to foreign investors given the conditions of the IMF programme. Lack of incentives means there is little attraction for investors.”A proposed Investment Promotion Bill that aims to address many of the issues faced by investors is currently in the final stage of being drafted, said the official. He expressed optimism that once the bill becomes law, it would give current and potential investors more confidence when it comes to the investment climate in Sri Lanka.On the subject of foreign investment, the Joint Executives’ Alliance of the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) has written to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake requesting him to reconsider what they claim is a proposal to hand over operations of the Colombo Port’s East Container Terminal (ECT) to a private party. Pointing out that the SLPA has already made a substantial investment in developing the ECT using its own financial resources, the union claims that it is its opinion that the best option for Sri Lanka is to operate the ECT under the full ownership and direct operational control of the SLPA, as originally planned.A senior government source acknowledged there was a proposal, currently under discussion, to float an international tender so that a reputed company with experience in port operations could come in and expedite the work so that the ECT can start operations and bring in revenue. “We are not happy with the slow pace of development of the ECT project. This issue has already been discussed at the highest level. We want this terminal to start work soon, which is why we are considering this proposal, but nothing has been finalised so far,” the source emphasised.
People attend a nationwide protest by campaign group Gen Z regelt (Gen Z takes charge) against underfunding of schools, cuts to education, social services, culture and healthcare, rising living costs, and military conscription, in Frankfurt, Germany, October 31, 2026. REUTERS/Kai PfaffenbachGerman Gen Z-led demonstrations follow others across EuropeRioters loot stores in Frankfurt as Gen Z-led protests in Germany turn violentBy Kai Pfaffenbach, Tilman Blasshofer and Miranda MurrayOctober 31, 2026SummaryProtesters loot stores in FrankfurtGen Z-led demonstrations follow others across EuropeYoung people demand better education, lower living costsSome shops along Berlin's Kurfuerstendamm board up windowsFRANKFURT/BERLIN, Oct 31 (Reuters) - Hooded rioters looted stores in Frankfurt late on Saturday after tens of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets across Germany's biggest cities to demand better education and lower living costs.The protests followed a wave of Gen Z-led demonstrations across Europe this year. In Serbia, student-led activism helped unseat the country's longtime leader at the ballot box, while protests in France have descended into rioting and looting.The German protests organised by the campaign group "Gen Z regelt" — "Gen Z takes charge" in German — took place in 34 cities including Berlin, Frankfurt and Munich. The group says it opposes compulsory military service and wants greater investment in education as many young Germans struggle with rising costs.In Frankfurt, Germany's financial hub, at least two stores were looted as protests turned violent, with several more damaged and police trying to get the situation under control, according to a Reuters witness."Violent disturbances are continuing," Frankfurt police said on X. "In the city centre, windows have been smashed at several shops. Molotov cocktails are also being thrown at the emergency services. We urge all bystanders to avoid the city centre or to leave the area."Official numbers on Saturday afternoon suggested turnout was below the 182,000 participants that organisers initially expected. Police in Frankfurt, Munich and Berlin reported as many as 18,000 protesters, half the roughly 36,000 on the organisers' website.German authorities said Saturday's demonstrations, which coincide with Halloween festivities, had been largely peaceful, but warned of attempts by extremist groups to exploit the movement.In Hamburg, some barricades had been set on fire."We are here today to fight for peace and freedom, rather than for war and coercion," Gen Z regelt spokesperson Lina Friedrich said in Berlin on Saturday."What matters most to us is better support for the health and education systems. We are against compulsory military service and we are in favour of a fairer distribution of the burden."LUXURY SHOPS BOARD UP WINDOWSParts of Germany's far-left extremist scene and some groups linked to foreign extremist movements have joined efforts to mobilise support, according to the federal interior ministry."We all have those images from France in our minds — looting, burning houses, burning police vehicles, and attacks on police officers," said Roman Poseck, interior minister for the state of Hesse, whose capital is Germany's financial hub, Frankfurt."France must not be held up as a model in this regard."Some businesses across German cities boarded up windows and planned early closures ahead of the demonstrations due to concerns over possible unrest, including along Berlin's luxury Kurfuerstendamm shopping boulevard.Organisers have focused on what they see as the growing pressure on younger generations in Europe's largest economy."The government has offered no response to our concerns other than to continue making cuts and piling further burdens upon us," said Steve, an 18-year-old due to speak at a rally in Munich, addressing Chancellor Friedrich Merz."We will continue to exercise our fundamental right to assemble until you stop ignoring us."Germany has struggled to revive economic growth. The country also faces growing pressure on pensions and public services as baby boomers retire and the working-age population shrinks.Questions have been raised about who is driving the campaign and whether it is genuinely youth-led, given the broad mix of political and civil society groups involved.Germany's national school student umbrella organisation, BSK, has distanced itself from the initiative and plans to hold a separate day of protest on November 20.Sean Baker, a student at the Technical University of Berlin, said he would join the protests on Saturday to call attention to the poor state of buildings on campus."When you go inside and enter the rooms, it looks like an abandoned building," he told Reuters. "Yet this is where we're expected to study on a regular basis."Reporting by Miranda Murray, Timm Reichert, Tilman Blasshofer, Stephan Schepers and Martin Schlicht; Additional reporting by Christoph Steitz; Editing by Ros Russell, Joe Bavier, Alex Richardson and David Gregorio
ஈழச் சோனகர் ஈனச் சுத்திகரிப்பு நினைவாக.இன்று கறுப்பு ஒக்ரோபர் -ஈழச் சோனகர் சுத்திகரிப்பின் 37ஆம் ஆண்டு நினைவாகும்.கறுப்பு ஒக்ரோபர் 1990 இல் ஈழச் சோனகருக்கு நடந்தது என்ன? இலங்கை-வடமாகாணத்தை சந்ததி சந்ததியாக தமது நிலையான வாழ்விடமாகவும், அங்கு தமக்கான -விவசாயம், மீன்பிடி, வணிகம், சிறு கைத்தொழில், அரசாங்க நிர்வாக சேவை,ஆசிரியத் தொழில் போன்ற பொருளுற்பத்தி,மற்றும் தொழில் நடவடிக்கைகளில் ஈடுபட்டும், பொதுவான வாழ்வுப் பிரதேசத்தை-நில உரிமையாகக் கொண்டும், தமிழ் மொழியைத் தம் தாய் மொழியாகவும், சோனகர் என்ற சமூக அடையாளத்தையும், இஸ்லாமியர் அல்லது முஸ்லீம் என்ற மத அடையாளத்தையும் கொண்டு இலங்கையின் இதர சமூகப் பிரிவினருக்கு ஈடான கால நீட்சியையும் கொண்ட நிலையான சமூகத்தினர், இவை அனைத்தில் இருந்தும் பிய்த்துப்பிடுங்கி பெயர்த்து எடுக்கப்பட்டு, ஒட்டுமொத்த சமூகமும் ஒரே திரளாக வேரறுத்து வீசப்பட்டது.இது வெறும் வெளியேற்றம் அல்ல இது ஒரு வேரறுப்பு.இவ்வாறு வேரறுத்து எறியப்பட்டோர் சுமார் 75 ஆயிரம் பேரென கணிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.இந்த ஈனச் சுத்திகரிப்புக்கு வடமாகாணம் முழுவதிலும் எடுத்த காலம் ஆக ( ஒக்ரோபர் 15 முதல், 30 வரை) இரண்டு வாரம்! சராசரியாக 24 மணி நேரத்தில் 7500 பேர், தமது பூர்வீகத்தை மூட்டை கட்டிக் கொண்டு கிளம்பியிருக்க வேண்டும்!இவர்கள் சாமானிய உழைக்கும் மக்கள்.மிகப் பெரும்பாலானோர் ஏழை எளிய அன்றாட நாட்கூலிகள்.உள்நாட்டிலும் (புத்தளம்), வெளி நாடுகளிலும் (கனடா) என புது மண்ணில் போய் விழுந்தனர்.பள்ளிவாயில்கள், கல்விச் சாலைகள் உட்பட தமது தேட்டத்தையெல்லாம் காவு கொடுத்து விட்டு, நிலத்தை இழந்து, உழவு இயந்திரங்கள், குழாய்க் கிணறுகள், கசாப்புக் கடைக் கத்திகள், வாள்கள், தையல் எந்திரங்கள்,வலைகள், படகுகள், பேக்கரிகள் என உற்பத்திக் கருவிகள், தொழில்கள் அனைத்தையும் தாரை வார்த்த தாங்கொணாத் துயரத்தோடு, கணியன் பூங்குன்றநாரை வியந்தபடி வெறுங்கைகளை மட்டும் நம்பி புது வாழ்க்கையைத் தொடங்க-தொடங்க, நிர்ப்பந்திக்கப்பட்டனர்.37 ஆண்டுகளாகியும் இவர்கள் இன்னும் பழைய சமூக இருப்பை எட்டவில்லை.உள் நாட்டிலும் வெளிநாடுகளிலுமாக சிதறுண்டு சின்னா பின்னமாகிப் போயுள்ளனர்.இலங்கையர் கட்சிகளும், இஸ்லாமிய கட்சிகளும், தமிழ் பேசும் கட்சிகளும் தமது வயிறு வளர்த்துக் கொண்டனர்.அரக்களைய, அமைப்பு மாற்ற அரசாங்கம் அடுத்த சுற்றிற்கு ஆயத்தமாக சட்டமியற்றிவருகின்றது.நாடாளமன்றம் எப்போதும் போல பாசிசத்திற்கு படியமைக்கின்றது.இவ் வரலாற்றுப் பழி குறித்த விபரத் தொகுப்பில், மறைந்த டி.பி.எஸ்.ஜெயராஜ் அவர்களின் சிறந்ததொரு கட்டுரையை இங்கே ( கறுப்பு ஒக்ரோபர் 1990 இல் ஈழச் சோனகருக்கு நடந்தது என்ன?) அழுத்திப் படிக்க முடியும்.1) எதற்காக இந்த பழி நேர்ந்தது என்பதற்கு இன்றுவரையும் எந்த நம்பத் தகுந்த விளக்கமும் இல்லை.விசாரணையும் இல்லை.விமர்சனமும் இல்லை.2) அதற்காக இதுவரையில் எவரும் அந்தச் சமூகத்திடம் ஒரு பொது மன்னிப்பு கோரியதில்லை, அதற்கு தயாராகவும் இல்லை. ஓரு வேளை இதை `` இன்பியல்`` என்று கருதியிருப்பார்களோ!நிற்க.இந்தப் பழி ஒரு முடிந்த கதையல்ல.2009 இற்குப் பிந்திய போக்கும், அண்மைய நிகழ்வுகளும் இதை உறுதி செய்கின்றன.1990 ஈனச் சுத்திகரிப்புக்கு காரணமான `சமூகப் பகைமை` இன்றும் பசுமரத்தாணிபோல் உள்ளது.மேலும் குறிப்பிட்ட இரு மத சமூகங்களுக்கு இடையிலானதாக மட்டுமல்லாமல், குறுக்கும் நெடுக்குமாக, ஒன்றோடு ஒன்றாக எல்லாமும் மோதிக்கொள்வதற்கான திட்டமிடல் தெளிவாகத் தென்படுகின்றது.குட்டையைக் குழப்புவதற்கான புறவய அவசியம் தாராளமாகவே உள்ளது.இவ்வாறு வெவ்வேறு வடிவங்களில், வெவ்வேறு பரிமாணங்களில் மத முரண்பாடு திட்டமிட்டு வளர்க்கப்படுகின்றது. பாரதூரமான திசை நோக்கிப் பயணிக்கின்றது.பாதகம் செய்ய பாரதம் இருக்கின்றதஇதைத் தடுத்து நிறுத்தவேண்டும், தவறினால் இலங்கையில் ஒரு இராமாயணத் தீ மீண்டும் மூளும். இந்த ஆராய்ச்சியை-கறுப்பு ஒக்ரோபர் 1990 கோர நிகழ்விற்கு ஈழ மற்றும் இலங்கைச் சோனக சகோதர சமூகத்தினரிடமும், உலகளாவிய இஸ்லாமிய மக்களிடமும், போராடும் மக்கள், நாடுகள், அமைப்புகளிடமும் பொது மன்னிப்புக் கோரி ஆரம்பிக்கின்றோம்.தமிழ் இனத்துவமும் இஸ்லாமிய விரோதமும்தொடரும்:புதிய ஈழப் புரட்சியாளர்- Eelam New Bolsheviks-ENB29-10-2026
