Page 1
A. Theva Rajan
am
As Official Languag.
Retrospect and prospect
International Centr Colo
 

e for Ethnic Studies mbo

Page 2

T A M
AS
OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
Retrospect and
Prospect
A. THEVA RAJAN
International Centre for Ethnic Studies Colombo

Page 3
First Edition 1995 Second Edition 1998
ICES
2 Kynsey Terrace Colombo 8 Sri Lanka
SBN 955-580-006-5

Foreword
Chapter I
Chapter II
Chapter III
Chapter IV
Chapter V
Chapter VI
Chapter VII
Chapter VIII
Chapter ΙΧ
Contents
Tamil Through the Ages in Sri Lanka
The Position of Tamil Under Colonial Rule
Sinhala and Tamil As Official Language
Sinhala Only As Official Language
Fresh Hopes under New Constitution
Tamil Pushed to Back - Stage in Parliament
Implementation of the Sixteenth Amendment by Provincial Councils and Local Bodies
Implementation of Tamil As Official Language General Administration
Education
Conclusions and Recommendations
71
82
103
124

Page 4

ForeWord
This study was commissioned by ICES (Colombo) as part of a project on which it was engaged to promote the implementation of the provisions regarding official languages in the 13th and 16th Amendments to the Sri Lankan Constitution, adopted in 1987.
Other activities undertaken under the project included the organisation, in collaboration with the Department of Official Languages, oftwo workshops on official languages - one, in relation to administration and the other, in relation to education. The first of these workshops led to the creation by an Act of Parliament, of an Official Languages Commission - a body whose establishment was first proposed by us at that workshop. The Commission was cmpowered, as we had proposed, to monitor the implementation of the constitutional amendments regarding language, receive representations and complaints by the public, and initiate remedial action, where necessary.
Another activity undertaken as part of the same project was the making of four films on different aspects of the question of official languages. These were offered to the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation but not shown at that time; they have, however, been screened by us for other audiences.
Mr. Theva Rajan's study deals with the important subject of Tamil as an official language. While drawing in its early pages on history and ancient texts to demonstrate the recognition that the Tamil language and culture received in pre-colonial Sri Lanka, it traces the process by which official language became a controversial and conflictual issue in post-independence Sri Lanka. There were hopes that the acceptance of Tamil as "also an official language' by the constitutional amendments of 1987 would remove language from the arena of political conflict, and ruling politicians often claimed subsequently that the problem had finally been solved. Mr. Theva Rajan's study provides ample evidence that this has not in fact happened because of the scant attention given to the practical implementation of the constitutional amendments regarding language. Nor did the establishment of the Official Languages Commission substantially change the picture because, in spite of the wide powers given to it by the Act, the Commission did not make more than sporadic and piecemeal interventions to promote implementation.

Page 5
Although Mr. Theva Rajan's study was completed in 1992, the state of affairs he describes remained essentially the same down to the change of government in 1994. It is to be hoped that the commitment of the new government to ethnic peace and justice will find expression also in the field of language policy. The effective protection of the language rights of all sections of the people is an essential condition of real democracy and of popular consciousness that the State is not an alien body.
Editor, ICES (Colombo)

CHAPTER
TAMILTHROUGH THE AGES IN SRI LANKA
Start with a country. Call this country a democracy. Say that in this polity a third of the population speaks an indigenous language as old as any other major language spoken within that country.
You might think that such a language, neitheralien noran alien's tongue, would of necessity have long ago found its rightful place within the official policy of that country.
Yet the path which the Tamil language has taken toward receiving official recognition and usage within Sri Lanka can hardly be described as easy,
In order to better see the past and current situation, and to illuminate future roads, this paper presents the course taken to make the mother tongue of nearly a third of the total population of Sri Lanka an official language. To understand this movement toward official recognition, we might first appraise the long-term historical position which Tamil has occupied in this country.
Ancient epigraphical and literary sources reveal widespread usage of the Tamil language. The earliest lithic records in the Brahmi script, precursor to the modern-day Sinhala and Tamil alphabets, bear eloquent testimony to the popular usage of the Tamil language during the 3rd century B.C., if not earlier. Incidentally, no evidence of the use of any other languages or script prior to this period has surfaced thus far. We might also consider the manner in which current Sinhala script manifests the influence of the Indianoriginated Pallava Grantha script,
As a script, Brahmi reveals fossil traces of ancient linguistic movements and usage. From Sri Lanka's southernmost tip Denavara, now called Devinuwara or Dondra Head, stretching north to the Indian border with Afghanistan, to the shores of Egypt's Red Sea and portions of the former Soviet Union border with West Asia, Brahmi was used universally. As a kind of widespread Esperanto, Brahmiapparently facilitated various forms of cultural and commercial exchange within Asia and the Middle East.2
1

Page 6
Brahmi bears several different forms, but it is intercsting to note that Sri Lanka's early Brahmi provesidentical with South Indian Brahmi. After the significantarchaeological find of Bhatiprolu, in Andhra, Buhler differentiated South Indian Brahmias Dravidi. This Dravidi can be found in lithic traces of the ancient Indian Pandyan Kingdom, though it now goes by the appellation of Tamil Brahmi.
For our argument, it is interesting to consider that Tamil Brahmi predates what is known as Asokan Brahmi, a form taken in Sri Lanka only from the first century A.D.6
The earliest Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka are generally said to be in the Prakrit language. Rather than denoting any particular language, Prakrit simply means "old language". To further complicate the matter, among experts, terms differ.
Where Wilhelm Geiger will prefer to use the term the "Sinhala Prakrit" Senarat Paranavitane will say "old Sinhalese'.
Yet no matter the terms used to identify this lithic language, both wellreputed scholars have managed to ignore the presence of Tamil names and Tamil words in the Prakrit inscriptions. Obviously Tamil words such as Perumaka(n), Perumakal, Marumakan, Kaviti, Abi, among others, make a prominent appearance in these most ancient of Sri Lankan inscriptions.
Further, Tamil names, such as Siva, Yasopala, and Gopal, for example, as well as the names of Tamil social groups or clans like those of the Utiya (n), Ays, Vels, Barata, Naga and others, show that the popular language was at the very least amixture of Tamil, Dravidian, orproto-Dravidian languages.7 Velupillai has skillfully demonstrated the influence of Tamil even on linguistic aspects.
Tamil classical literature of the Sangam period bears a great number of words revealing Tamilor Dravidian roots.This influence has led Ragupathy to suggest that area languages may have shared a common hase protoDravidian language.”
From our examination of linguistic traces alone, it becomes apparent that the Tamil language was one popularly used by the inhabitahts of Sri Lanka. But even more significantly, such traces reveal how vital was the role played by the Tamils in the social, religious and political affairs of Sri Lanka far before the advent of Christianity.
2

If we considcr the ancient scat of kingship in the city of Anuradhapura, for example, we find what is called the "Tamil Householders Terrace Inscription", written in a Brahmi script dating from between the 3rd and 1st century B.C. The inscription reads as follows: "The terrace of the Tamil Householders caused to be made by the Tamil Samara, residing at Ila. Bharata." Paranavitane observed that this inscription"proves that the stone terrace was the common property of the Tamil Householders of ancient Anuradhapura”:
. . . and was probably used as their assembly hall ... The platform on which it is inscribed is also one of the earliest examples of the earliest stone work of the Tamil people and the monument therefore deserves the notice of Indian archaeologists.10
That a Tamil ruin in Sri Lanka should be a peer to the oldest of Tamil ruins in India begins to evince the long history of the Tamils in Sri Lanka.
This history includes more than mere settlement. The Tamil contribution to Buddhism in both Sri Lanka and, incidentally, India helped vivify the Sangha. Upon the flight of stairs in Sri Lanka's Matale Thalgahogoda Vihara, for example, we find an inscription in early Brahmi which dates from the 2nd century B.C. From this commemoration, one learns of a Tamil Bhikkhu who had donated the cave to the Maha Sangha.l
Such material offering extends even into literary contribution: it is no secret that some of the earliest works of Sri Lankan Buddhist literature were written by Tamil Buddhist monks.
This admixture recurs when we note how often Sinhalese kings ordered inscriptions to be engraved in Tamil; even within Sinhalese inscriptions, the kings dictated enough telltale Tamil words to reveal the court's language true blend. For instance, in the tenth century A.D., King Kassapa V had ordered to be engraved two inscriptions. The Atavirogollava Pillar Inscription and the Rajamaligawa Pillar Inscription both possess Tamil names and words like Loganathan(n), Mekappar, Murandu, and Peranattu.
Another example of this admixture, in this case, of referents, can be found in Poonagari, 13 located in Sri Lanka's northern mainland: apotsherd in Brahmimentions a village called Velangama, referring to a village whose inhabitants belong to the Tamil class of the Wels. 14
3

Page 7
Again in the tenth century A.D., some of King Mahinda IV's inscriptions employ the following Tamil words: Viyal (Vayal), Nel, Veli, Varian, Nattiyam, and Mekappar, among others. More significantly, the same Mahinda decreed:
In all the places irrigated by the tank, the distribution of water shall be utilized for this Vihare only, in accordance with ancient customs in vogue formerly during the Tamil period
of rule.) 15
One can conjecture thateven this Vihare had becn built by Tamils. When speaking of the all-important issue of land allotments to Tamil residents, some of the royal inscriptions use names beginning with the Sinhalese word for Tamil Demel, such as Demele'-kuli. Demel - hetihaya, and other like allusions. Indrapala corroborates this suggestion of long-held land tenure: the element Demel in these names "obviously indicates some association with Tamils. They denote Tamil settlements in those places..."
He continues to note the implication for labor on behalf of the kingdom:
... it is not a pure coincidence that Tamil inscriptions of the eleventh century have been found not far from some of the Tamil allotments, Tamil lands and villages associated with the collection of Dernala-Kuli which are mentioned in the tenth-century Sinhalese inscriptions. 6
In other words, a strong conjunction of ancient evidence shows Tamil habitation and labor near the seat of Sinhalese kingship. From this, we can begin to understand just how deeply intertwined are the historical roots of the Tamil and Sinhalese populations of Sri Lanka.
The influence of Tamilon royal, religious and domestic inscriptions was not confined to those appearing within the Brahmi script. Even later Sinhalese inscriptions show the popular usage of Tamil words such as Viyal (vayal), Nel, Veli, Varian, Nattiyam, Mekappar, Parumar, Varumar, Kuli, Velan, Murandu, and Piranattu, among others. Contemporaneous South Indian inscriptions show a parallel usage of such words.
Not only do the ancient kingdoms' inscriptions reveal how much the
spheres of Tamil and Sinhala intersected, but also how such intersection
merged even those borders traditionally separating religion and commerce.
For instance, in Anuradhapura we find a Tamil inscription of the ninth or 4.

carly tenth century which speaks of a donation made by a Tamil Nankunattar mercantile guild to a Buddhist temple called Makkothai Palli.
This inscription bears at its end the following Venba verse:
" போதி நிழலமர்ந்த புண்ணியன்போ லெவ்வுயிர்க்குந்
தீதி லருள்சுரக்குஞ் சிந்தையா - னாதி வருதன்மங் குன்றாத மாதவன்மாக் கோதை யொருதர்ம பாலனுளன்”.17
In deciphering this passage, Indrapala notes the existence of an area called Thiruvanchikkalam or Makkothai in the vicinity of the South Indian coastal town of Cochin. He also notes the Cera King Makkothai and considers that the inscription refers either to the Kerala area or to King Makkothai. This verse proves notable not only for its evidence of strong ties between Tamil and Buddhist communities, but also for being the earliest verse entirely in Tamil to be found in Sri Lanka.
Also in Anuradhapura and dating from the ninth or tenth century, but among the ancient kingdom's Hindu ruins, two Tamil inscriptions refer to donations made to Hindu temples, while a third speaks of a donation to a Murugan Temple. The names used in the first two inscriptions strongly suggest a Pallava connection. The languages of all three inscriptions, especially those relating to Hindu temples, show "the usage of grammatically pure Tamil.”18
Such clean grammar can lead its examiners to understand that an ancient Tamil-speaking populace thrived in cohabitation with the ancient Sinhalaspeaking population.
As well as grammar, literary forms provide clues about a culture's in situ level of development. The KegalleDistrict's Kotagama offersus afourteenthcentury Tamil verse inscription celebrating the victory of Singai Aryan, the Arya Chakaravarti of the Jaffna Kingdom. 19
The verse in Tamil reads as follows:
" உத்தமர்தங் கோயில் வலகழி எனலும்
நித்தநியமம் நெறிவளர் சித்தமுடன் சீரிளமை சேர்ந்த பதியில் வினயாரம்ப பேரினமையார்த்துகள்
s

Page 8
போதா வாயிரங் கொண்டுரைப்பார் திரு சூத்தமாக முயன்றான் முயன்ற திரு”
Based on the above inscription, written in verses of delicately sculpted Tamil metric forms, Velupilai argues that a highly developed literary culture must have existed in the fourteenth century.20 For such a tradition to develop, there must have been a long usage of the language.
If we accept this long history of settlement as a given and continue to examine the Anuradhapura ruins, we find two Tamil inscriptions in the Granta script which continue to show how much Tamil played a part in the holiest of Buddhist precincts. Dated to the ninth or tenth century, this pair of liths only recently has been located in the famous Buddhist shrine, the Jetavanaramaya2 Referring to donations made to the Jetavanaramaya, the inscripted name of Narendra Ratna Jayawallabha Rayar suggests a strong Pallava connection.
Another example of this manner of intertwining can be found in the dual use of Tamil and Sinhala in the North Central Province's Delegama Dewala inscription.22
Do not think that support for the other's religious practice was unilaterally limited to Tamil donations to Buddhist or Sinhalese kingship. Evidence of Sinhalese contributions to both Hindu and Tamil communities abounds. At the Atakada Vihare, we find a Tamil inscription, dating from the eleventh or twelfth century, which mentions Uttama Chola. This passage refers to grants made by the Sinhalese king to a Sivan temple called Uttama Chola Iswaram situated at Kadave Korale in the North Central Province.2
Similarly, a twelfth-century Tamil inscription, ascribed to Jayabahu I and found at the Amparai District's Kirindigama, refers to grants made to a Brahmin village.24 A twelfth-century Tamil inscription found in Siva Devale No.3 in Padaviya refers to worship of the FootMark in Padaviya.25
The verse reads as follows:-
"தென்னிலங்கைக் கோன் பராக்கிரமபாகு நிச்சங்கமல்லற்
கியாண்டஞ்சிற் தினகரன் சுறவி வனைந்தவத்தையிலுத்திரட்டாதி யேழ்பக்கம் பொன்னவள் தின நற்சாதயோகத்தில் ஊர்தரு போதி
மாதவர்தம்

பொற்பமர் கோயில் முனிவராலயந்தேனறந் திகழ் சாலையுஞ்
செயித்தம்
அன்னவை திகழ ஐவர்கண்டன் வனுபேரி இலங்கை அதிகாரி
அலகுதடயன்
தென்பராக்ரமன் மேனைச்செனவி நாதன் திருப்பியரன்
மன்னிய சிறப்பில் மலிதருமழகாற் பராக்ரம அதிகாரிப் பிரிவுன
வளர்தர
அமைத்தான் பூரீபுர நகருள் மதிமான் பஞ்சரன் மகிழ்ந்தே"
Along this same path of inquiry, we find in the North Western Province's Panduwasnuwara (Kurunegala District) an inscription in Tamil ascribed to Sri Nissankamalla. Scholar K. Kanapathipillaiassigns this lith to the twelfth century,26 whereas K.G. Krishnan dates it to the thirteenth.27
Its text offers the following carefully crafted delineation:
“சேது, கங்கணம்வேற் கண்ணிணையாற் காட்டினார் காமர்வளைப் பங்கையக்கை மேற்றிலகம் பாரித்தார் - பொங்கொலிநீர்ச் சிங்கைநக ராரியனைச் சேரா வனுரேசர் தங்கள் மடமாதர் தாம்".
Hcre we read of Nissankamalla's construction of "a Buddhist temple, a monastery for monks, an alms Hall, a Caitya, and a College called Parakrama Atikari Pirivena." We can observe here not only a royal incription in Tamil, not only the Sinhalese support for the Tamil, but also the democracy; inherent in an even-handed list: the caitya is mentioned as equitably as the pirivena.
Such cquity continues in the significant Lankatilake inscriptions. Side. by side with Sinhalese inscriptions do the Tamil inscriptions appear, having been willed into being by both King Bhvaneka Bahu IV and King Vickrema Bahu III. These Tamil inscriptions refer to grants made to both Buddhist and Hindu Temples.28
This sense of the flux and travel of cultures from ancient time onward has ample support in the interesting Galle Trilingual inscription, indited in all of Chinese, Persian and Tamil. The whole having been ordered by a fifteenth-century Chinese king, the Tamil inscription, wherein the words Tenavarai Nayanar and Tenavarai Alvar become significant, refers to donations made to a Sivan Temple and a Vishnu Temple. 29 Destroyed by
7

Page 9
thc Portuguese, the mentioned massive Vishnu Temple still stands, albeit in ruins, at Devinuwara, both a corroboration of the inscription and a recollection of the temple's past magnificence. Though in the same area there also stood a Sivan temple, as yet no trace of the old site has been unearthed.
Tellingly, there is no dearth of Tamil inscriptions indited by both Sinhalese and Tamil kings. Table I gives in brief a few of these liths which testify to the preponderant usage of the Tamil language by even the Sinhalese kings.
As Sri Lankan territory was basically fragmented, each district had its own ruling king. That Tamil inscriptions were created over the entirety of Sri Lanka conveys an important point. As kings deliver their messages in the language of their people, Tamils, at least in small concentrations, lived throughout Sri Lanka.
However, even the absence of Tamil inscriptions does not mean the absence of Tamil settlements. Consider how often the aforementioned inscriptions speak in one breath, as it were, of donations to both Buddhist and Hindu temples. This simultaneity epitomizes not only the religious and linguistic equality advocated by the kings, but also the high culture and civilized outlook sponsored by both the ancient kings and their people.
Such equitability marks the absence of hatred, a necessary cornerstone for a true and vibrant democracy, and one which we would do well to remember today.
If we continue from our investigation of inscriptional evidence to examine literary texts, we find from various literary sources that Tamil was an elective subject in Buddhist pirivenas, and that most members of the clergy, as well as scholars and laymen, were learned in the Tamil language.
One wishing to learn more on the position of Tamil in Sri Lankan history as revealed by literary sources would do well to see the wealth of material that has been published on the subject.0
But even looking no farther than The Mahavamsa, we find that the fourteenth century's King Parakramabahu IV had as his tutor a monk of Chola origin. Having built a temple at Vidagama in the Raigam Korale of the Kalutara District, Parakramabahu donated the structure to this monk.3

During his lifetime, Parakramabahu's Cholian monk proved to be no mean influence. Kariyawasam makes the following observations with regard to the furtherance of Tamil influence on Sinhala literature:
It is possible that from the Cholian monk's) time onwards Tamil assumed greater importance in this land. Tamil poems were studied in the Pirivenas. The Pali Jatakatthakatha was translated into Sinhalese under the guidance of him). This work contains many words and even constructions of Tamil origin.32
Such influence was not limited to Parakramabahu IV. Kariyawasam goes on to note that:
. . . during the time of King Parakrama Bahu VI (1412-1467 AD) too the study and cultivation of Tamil received much encouragement. This King had many connections with the Tamils. His Chief Minister was a Tamil prince from Kerala, Nannurtunaiyar, who married Ulakudai Devi, his daughter. Prince Sapumal or Senbagapperumaland his youngerbrother, Prince of Ambulugala, adopted sons of the same King, were children born to a Sinhalese Princess married to a Tamil Prince from Cola. Prince Sapumal ascended the throne of Kotte under the title of Bhuvanckabahu VI (1468-1474 AD) and Ambulugala too reigned at Kotte, under the title of Vira Parakramambahu VIII (1484-1509 AD).
The Tamil people's intermixing was limited not only to the royal court's domestic life but extended itself toeducation as well. Kariyawasam observes that:
The King's chaplains during this time were Tamils again. King Parakramabahu VI’s tutor and benefactor Maha Vidagama Thera, became the head of the Vidagama temple after she demise of the Cholian monk. This monk, who according to tradition was tutor to the famous Sri Rahula Sangharaja of Totagamuva Vijayaba Pirivena (anotheradopted son of King Parakramabahu VI) must have been a Tamil scholar, having been heir to a Tamiltradition. Both Sri Rahula Thera and Vikagama Maitreya Thera, no doubt, knew Tamil well. Pancika Pradipaya of Sri Rahula Tinera mcntions a
9

Page 10
Tamil glossary to the Pali Jatakatthakatha, which had been consulted by him, along with a host of other books, in the compilation of that work. Maitreya Thera's Lovada Sangarava, a didactic work, is said to contain several ideas identical with Naladiyar.
That scholarly monks were consulting Tamil sources becomes hardly a surprise when we consider the prevalence of Tamil Sandesa Kavyas (Dutu literature) or Message Poems which appeared as a popular form during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Most of these Sandesa Kavyas describe educational and religious activities, speckled with an occasional reference to the royal court.
The Kokila Sandesa of Irugal Kulatila Pirivena Thera proves interesting on many accounts. First, it refers to the study of Tamil at the Buddhist Paiyagalla Pirivena:
වයියා කරන තත් - දෙමළ කවිවර රඳතා පයියාගල වෙහෙර - මුනිඳු දැක නැමදා යව සතොසින්
Later, Kokila Sandesa refers to Parakrama Bahu VII’s royal court in which shone luminary poets laureate and scholars versed in all of Elu (Sinhala), Tamil, Pali and Sanskrit:
සොඳ එළු දෙමළ මාගද සකු බස පසිදු ෙසඳ මියුරසින් නොසැකෙව් කිවියෙනි ğ3ózg ඔඳ ගුණ ගිහිණි නම් කළයුතු මහ කිවිදු වැඳ වැඳ කියති නොමඳ ව කව් බැඳ විරිඳු
Another Message Poem, the Gira Sandesa of Sri Rahula, refers to the monastic study of Sinhala, Tamil, Pali and Sanskrit, Pali, in various classes
held in Galle’s Tottagamuwa Vijayaba Pirivena:
සිරිමත් සොඳුරු එ වෙහෙරැ තැන තැන ලකුළු
ඉදෑසිත් ලෙසට පෙර කිවියර සිරි රුකුළු දැනගැගත් සඳ ලකර වියරණ වියත් මුළු පවසන් සකු මගද එළු දෙමළ කවි 25)ó
Similarly, the Savul Sandesa refers to the presence of poets laureate in Rajasingha I's royal court. These poets were likewise versed in Elu, Tamil, Pali and Sanskrit:
10

ගැඹුරු සකු මගද - හෙළු දෙමෙළහ ŠጎGgዽi .
සොදුරු සඳ ලකර - වියරණ දත් කිවිදු මියරු අරුත් යොදමින් කව් බැඳ විරුදු අතුරු නොව කියති - සබතුරෙහි නර නිඳු
These Message Poems prove fascinating not only for their detailing of the representative usage of languages but also for describing shared sites of religious awe. For instance, the Paravi Message Poem refers to a Kali Kovil in Bentota where both Sinhalese and Tamils worshipped.
රන් තැටි අයුරු තුග පින් පියොවුරු උදු C මන් අටි කරන අගනන් රගදෙන ඉපි @ උන් සැටි බලා සිටි සලෙළුන් නොපෑ ඇ (9. බෙන් තොටි නෙතර සැතපෙව කාලි කෝවි S.
Such blending becomes more apparent when we read the Selalihini Sandesa of Sri Rahula which refers to the Sivan Temple situated quite near the Royal Court of Sri Jayewardhanapura Kotte (of the Kingdom of Kotte):
කළු, වැල් කපූරු දුමැතුළ ලෙළෙන දදෙප සුවිසල් මිහිගු සක්සන් මිණි හඩ වත කරැලෝල් සතන් පවසන තියුගි දෙම මනකල් ඉසුරු කෝවිල, ලගිනේ ලක
The passage reads:
Rest thou in the beautiful Devala where, amidst funes of camphor and black aloe - wood, rows of banners are waving, where the din of Tamil drums, conchs and ringing and tinkling bells is spread far and wide, and where eulogistic hymns are chanted by Tamil maidens so as to attract every one.
The words of the passage ring especially true when we consider the temples prevalent along Sri Lanka's western and southern coasts. These abundant temples for Siva, Vishnu, Murugan (Skanda), Ganesa and other deities formed sites for both Tamils and Sinhalese to worship. As we observed earlier, from both epigraphic and literary evidence we know that there lived Tamil Buddhists and bhikkus.
The function of Tamil as a language which could be used to detail fundaments of belief seems clear when we note that King Parakrama Bahu
1

Page 11
IV of Dambadeniya (also known as Pandita Parakramabahu) ordered cven such a basic cornerstonc of royal cosmology as a treatise on astrology, the Caracotimalai, to be written in Tamil.
We have considered literary sources which evince the habits of shared belief, study, and worship among Tamil and Sinhalese. If we focus our question into one which examines how sheerly linguistic modes were shared, we find the great legacy by which Tamil has enriched Sinhala both in grammar and literature.
In his appraisal of this legacy, Godakumbure says:
Dravidian languages have, however, had (an) influence on Sinhalese chiefly through contact, and Tamil being the language spoken by a larger population in the neighbouring part of India, it asserted a wide influence on the vocabulary, grammar, and literature of the Sinhalese.
He goes on to note that the "people of Ceylon", believing Tamil culture to be superior, took on habits which conflated their very identity with that of the Tamils. Not only did they adopt Tamil names, but they wrote something as crucial to their identity as their individual signatures in thc Tamil script.
Returning to a solely linguistic appraisal, Godakumbere traces the Tamil influence upon not only the structure of the Sinhalese language, but also upon its grammatical terminology:
In the oldestexisting Sinhalesegrammar, the Sidat Sangarawa (thirteenth century), which for the most part adopts the methods and phraseology of the Sanskrit grammarians, there are certain passages which clearly display its indebtedness to Tamii.33
Godakumbure also gives a list of works which have been either translated or adapted from Tamil sources.3 Though the Mahabharata is a work in Sanskrit, a language which considerably influenced Sinhala literature, it was only in the seventeenth century that a Buddhist priest from Kandy District's Kobbekaduwa produced the Mahabharata from a Tamil source asa Jataka story. This work of 1514 stanzas, entitled Maha Padaranga Jatakaya was edited by D.R.Seneviratne and published in 1929:
12

In addition to the Mahabharata, some of the other works produced from Tamil sources include Vetalam Katava, Ramayanaya. Vallimata Katava, Pattini Halla, Valalu Katava, Dinatara Katava, Sinnamuttu Katava, Kancimale Sulambavati Katava, Atulla Katava, Ravana Hella, Vayanti Male, Vitti hata, and Hariccandara Katava.
Among them, the first two chapters of Kamba Ramayanam in Tamil was translated into Sinhalese by J.V. Abhayagunawardhana in 1841, to be revised and published by C.D. Bastian in 1886. Vallimata Katava was written by Mudlr.A.Vijayasundara of Matara in 1772. Pattini Halla and Wayantimale relate to Cilappatikaram, while Vayantimale was written by Tisimhala Kavitilaka of Vidagama in Kalutara. Hariccandara was written by a poet from Dodanvala who also went by the name of Doddanvala Kirindu. From this list, we see that as much as the Kandyan area played an important role in preserving and producing works of literary worth, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the South played an equally important role in enlightening the populace to the value of knowledge drawn from Tamil sources.
If we return to the sixteenth century, we see the extent to which Tamil was respected as a language of culture and learning. Alagiawanna Mukavetti, the author of Subashithaya, says:
Ishall interpret the great laws of conduct which have come to us from the mouths of the sages of old and which have been embodicci in the books, and state their substance in Sinhalese rhymes for the benefit of the ignorant who have not studied Tamil, Sanskrit and Pali.
පහළ පොරණ ඉසිවර මුවිනි මනනද දෙමළ සකු මගද නොහසළ සතට ሩሩ පුවල නිති සත ගත පද අරුත් ලෙද
සිහළ බසින් පැකෙවින් කියම් පද G)'e,
Though Mukawetti was bold indelineating the territory of sophistication, this same valuation of Tamil recurs on a more subtle level if we observe in what exalted company Tamil appeared. The Kav Silumina, considered the foremost Sinhala poem of the twelfth century, has in canto six, stanza fourty-eight, the word melap which means "canopy" in Tamil. Because the Sinhalese word viyan was also in use at that time, the Venerable Valivittiye SorataNayaka Thera, one time Vice-Chancellor of the Vidyodaya University who in 1946 edited this great poem, explains:
13

Page 12
(that Melap is from the Tamil word (Gudgustul ). The fact that this word has been used here in preference to the very well known word Viyan, shows that even during the time of the composition of this poem, there was many a bond between Sinhalese and the Tamils even in the Courts of Kings.
('that this quote appears on page 122 of the Thera's work should appear in the footnote).35
Even the highly resonant Kandyan Convention of 1815 was signed in Tamil by some Kandyan chiefs. As the learned Venerable Valivitiye Soratay Thera has aptly put it, "there was many a bond between Sinhales ar, Tamils even in the Courts of Kings" in the pre - colonial period of this, country.
As we noted before, the strength of this bond transcended the pettiness of contemporary communalist hatreds, absent during the pre-colonial period. Clergy, kings, court officials and laypeople alike were highly cultured and faithful enough to follow the core teachings of their respective religions.
We might close our retrospective of pre-colonial Tamil to note that this absence of hatred, as documented in linguistic sources, led to the emergence of the popular Sinhalese nursery rhyme, which, in translation to the cumbrous rhthyms of English, reads:
Child: Mummy, Mummy! To Galle I go! cree8 p368 Goog cooo)
Mother: Why Sonna, to Galle? මොටද පුතේ ගාලූ යන්නේ
Child: To study two languages. බාසා දෙකක් ඉගෙන ගන්න
Mother: What languages? මොන බසද ඉගෙන ගන්නේ
Child: Tamil and Sinhalese. ආන්දරා සේන්දරා
14

NOTES
O
11
Fernando, P.E.E., "Palaeographical Development of the Brahmi Script in Ceylon from 3rd Century B.C. to 7th Century AD". University of Ceylon Review - Vol.VII, 1949.
Thapar. Romila, "The Past and Prejudice", 1990.
Karunaratne, W.S., Epigraphia Zeylanica, Vol.VII 1987, Ramesh, K.V., Indian and Sri Lankan Epigraphy - a comparative study Ancient Ceylon No.7 Vol. 1, 1990, pp. 179-184.
Mahadevan, I, "Corpus of Tamil Brahmi Inscriptions" 1989.
Kasinathan, Natana, “Epigraphy” (Tamil) - 1989.
Karunaratne, V.S., op.cit.
Theva Rajan, A., “Did Ceylon Tamils embrace the new Faith?" Times Weekender. 2nd June, 1966 pp.6 11., (2) Tamil Patronage to the spread of Buddhism in Ceylon" - Times Weekender, 10th June, 1968, pp.8 - 10.
Veluppillai, A., "Tamil Influence in Ancient Sri Lanka with Special Reference to Early Brahmi Inscriptions'. Jouniral of Tamil Studies, Madras, NO.16, Dec. 1979- pp.63-77, No. 17, June 1980, pp.6-19.
Ragupathy, P. "Language of the Sri Lankan Brahmi Inscriptions," Paper read at the 17th Annual Conference of the Epigraphical Society of India, held at the Tamil University, Thanjavur (February 2 - 4, 1991) Unpublished.
Paranavitane, S. "Tamil Householders Inscription at Anuradhapura". Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (Ceylon Branch), Voll: XXXVpt.93, pp.55,56.
Sumanajothi Oaranagama and Wijesuriya, S.S.,"The Ancient Temples in Matale District." 1984.
Wickremasinghe, D.M. de Z, Epigraphia Zeylanica, Vol. II -pp. 47, 56.
15

Page 13
7
20
2
22
23
24 .
Pushparatnam, P., "Recent Discoverics of Epigraphs with VEl and Eelam in Jaffna Region" - Paper submitted to the Thanjavur Symposium - FEB. 2 - 4, 1991 - Unpublished - (vide f. 8).
Mahadevan, I, DINAMANI, July 01, 1990. (Iravatham Mahadevan read it as Velan). -
Wickremasinghe, D.M. de Z, "Slab Inscription at Mihintale," Epigraphia Zeylanica, Vol. I, pp.90,97, 113.
Indrapala, K., "Early Tamil Settlements in Ceylon," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (New Series) Vol.XIII - p.50, 1968.
(Indrapala's conclusion that there were no permanent Tamil settlements prior to the 13th century in Sri Lanka is untenable in the
light of archaeological and epigraphical evidence that have surfaced
since he presented this paper. He himself has since changed his views).
Indrapala, K, "Nankunattar Kalvettu of Anuradhapura," CINTANAI, Vol. NO.4 1968 p.34.
Veluppillai, A, "Some Newfindings from a critical study of the three earliest Tamil inscriptions discovered in Sri Lanka' Ancient Ceylon NO.7, Vol.2, 1990, pp.414-420.
Veluppillai, A, Ceylon Tamil Inscriptions - Part II.
Veluppillai, A., "Early (Tamil) Literature of Sri Lanka and the historical background." - Inaugural lecture (Tamil) -University of
Jaffna, March, 1986, pp.6-8.
Rohanadeera, Mendis, "Salapatara (stone Pavement) Inscriptions of the Abhayagiri Stupa and the Jetavana Stupe.” - Ancient Cevlom NO.7, Vol.2, pp.231 & 240.
Veluppillai, A, Ceylon Tamil Inscriptions - Part II.
Ibid - part I.
Ibid.
6

26
27
28
29
30
31
Ibid.
Kanapathipillai, K, "Tamil Inscription of Panduwasnuwara,' University of Ceylon Review, Vol.XVIII, 1960, pp. 57- 62.
Krishnan, K.G., "Notes on the Tamil Inscription of Panduwasnuwara," University of Ceylon Review, Vol.XX, 1962, pp. 15-18.
Paranavitane, S., "Lankatilake Inscriptions," University of Ceylon Review - Vol.XVIII - 1960 - pp. 1 - 44.
Paranavitane, S., "Galle Trilingual Inscription," Epigraphia Zeylanica, Vol. III. -
(a) Gunawardhana, Mudlr. W.F., The Origin of the Sinhalese
Language, 1918.
b) ධම්මරතන, හිස්ස(ල්ලේ ස්වාමින් වහන්සේ, "සිංහලයේ ද්‍රවිඩ
බලපෑම්” – 1963
(c) ද සිල්වා, ග්‍රී චාල්ස්, සිරි ගීය (1968)
(d) Hewawasam, P. B.J., Tamil Sources of Some Sinhalese
literary Works, with special reference to Lokopakaraya," Tamil Culture Vol.IX No.3, 1961, pp.241 - 262.
(e) සබ්‍රමනියම්, එන්, සිංහල සාහිත්‍යයේ ද්‍රවිඩ පුහාවය, 1991
(f) තේවරාජන්, ආ, සිරිලක වියතුන් සිත්ගන් දෙමළ බස,
ශ්‍රී ලංකා දීප - 1975 ජුනි 08
Subhe Vidduma gamasmim - rajaggama purantike
Varam Siri ghananandam - parivena samayutam
Viharam Karayitvana - subodhi patimagharam
Attano garu Coliya - Maha theressa dapay.
- Mahavamsa Ch:90, Stanza 98/99.
17

Page 14
32
33
34
35
Cited by P.B.J. Kariyawasam in : Tamil Sources of Some Sinhalese Literary Works with special reference to Lokopakaraya. "Tamil Culture," Vol.9 NO.3, 1961.
Kariyawasam, P.B.J. op.cit., pp.244/245
Godakumbure, C.E., "The Dravidian Element in Sinhalese." Bulletin of thc school of Oriental and African Studies.-Vol.XI, University of London, pp.837-841.
Godakumbure, C.E., Sinhalese Literature, pp. 179-181, 182, 282.
Hewawasam, P.B.J. cp.cit. cited at p.244.
18

^^3s^3}ł uoIKəɔ go Kussuɔasun - ĤOn seliţddnțəA
-Op
-opnɔO/Inf z ToA seurup '130/int II '10A teuthu!) Hold - i 10 130/InI ? '|0A wuŋutɔ i old - 110
三k,L)
I’ld - IĴO
-op
III.AX YI C) [] XX À Q. f)
Zld - I LO
Zld ~ || 10
Zld - † 10
I kd - J 10
l kl - † 10
† '0N
, '!0A stub|up
ɔɔinos
SONIX TIVNVL (INV. ASoTVHNIS X8 CIALICINI SNOILII ROSNI TIWYL GIVNos Jo įsit y
ueņeutuvų polse? Usulqeug 201 sluzio-səlɛŋa ŋɔddoɔ Ssɔɔlʊʊ sesos e put vụsəuvojo sops uz ĻĻA szimpew uolį sɔŋɔųOJO ĮSIA səlɛŋa ŋɔddoɔ 2Ịdulo Luvēnunwe Oısıtıcı9
3Ịdulos npu H e os pues joslucio 2ļduolueầnmW e 01 slucio
ələỊduloɔus uJesɛAsɔuunwlɛ əỊdula Lucas aqlol slučio 2ềell'Auluqerq e 01 slusio əĮduos usAIS e os suojo ɔpɛn əusieui - uoassex aq se suɔuloặuvise-ass iduos equelo » Isuel-2|duains|uppng e o siuvio siɔiexquìnbussed jo peəų Oı sıuelp (poleo0upi uleleasnaynısı) umreasoffersey 01 sluzio (Su00dụɔsu!?) 332|| AusŲg e os siuvio UIEleosoleisses A asdual UEA!ş01.slupp oldulol npu H 20. SIUPIO idụos elpuzio-3,duolusiųppng vol slucio Su0nduosus ZosqeļBAe sį uoņuod v KỊuose - 312|duoɔu;
uondụxsuỊ ĐỊ jo slumuoɔ
‘V - suoņduosus Iļue LuosÁəɔ - LIOesedelpus*XI opg - IVNV LNIO
-Op
-Op-Op
-Op
‘AOld 'ısvg buļļos 'AOld ’M ’N BIview ‘A01A ISựg Euges ɔɑN 2Ampexucurel "10 00uu], ‘KI JEuƯew '10' 0ɔuŲ] "10 00UȚII d M N
dƆ N muuew (viole.W Áscussuo susjef
1ɔŋsiq 10 ɔɔuļA0id
I CIRIQXGINNV
sejmugulules II ɔqầusseses lules poussrutamųq
sunumojɔɔASviļņusu2S įįA0\\nIII. IA mqeqeses. A
-|A0XArusi |ļAnỊqueųJ. IA mųɛg 2ÁɛsɩA
ļA0\mu]]. IIA nqeg eẤesįA tuges (1S useW IA mựg tumisma UusaeAsɔuumW H mựg tuaerea BUBUIUseN III mựg zum Norma ||A0\\[u]]. IA JOA mựqeses. A maņeussN I mqeg eurenerea
ɛsɔswɛųc3e10WI mųæqeẤes mosmosurwII nipɑpføp wholeW| esereses [Pp]uex II mụeqesep !2!!!!ury. I nqeqeses. A eMgununpngI nqeqeses spoầxviiiĝu! HIl liqeqes?!)
euges (ầux eļ0ųɔ) sıÁzyI elpuose),
pɔlipusẩupy ɔjɔųÅ ɔɔtɑɑjo aumeN
GWO ĻLI
OIWO ĻĻI CIWƆ [[19]
OIWO [19] (TWO ņ9|| CIWƆ iŋŞI CIWOųIŞI GWO ự};{ CIWO []; } OIWO ĮŽI OIWO Įs?| CTVO ĮIZ! OIWO [IZI CIWO ĮŽI CIWO [IZI (IWO [IZI (IWO Į
CIWƆ iŋ||
pouad
$|
ll 9||
ŞI 等 {| Z! 二
gas e N erh sr sh Ne s. ee ex P.
'0N Įvuos
19

Page 15
CHAPTER II
THE POSTION OF TAML UNDER COLONIAL RULE
As the country at the time of subjugation existed as the distinct kingdons cf Kandy, Kotte, and Jaffna, the Portuguese and Dutch continued to administer the country as three separate units.
When the British took possession of the country from the Dutch, they also maintained this distinction of three units until 1833 when, under the recommendations of the Colebrooke Commission, the country was brought under a unified system of administration.
While the three colonizing powers all used their own respective languages for official purposes, there exists no evidence to indicate that the colonizers, despite any of their other sins, discriminated between Sri Lanka's two indigenous languages, Sinhalese and Tamil. Documents speak instead of the freedom with which, when permitted, people could communicate with the government in either of the two indigenous languages. Following the example of the ancient kings who had messages inscribed in the language of the people, governmental orders were conveyed to the people in their two languages.
Evidence that the British Government used the two indigenous languages for communicating laws, by-laws, orders and notices abounds. At least until a sufficient sector conversant in English had been educated by English school curricula, the Government Gazette was published in English, Sinhalese and Tamil.
To observe the equitable regard in which the languages were held, we might examine the following specimens, covering a span of five years: Government Gazette No. 1,445, of the 20th of December, 1878; No. 1,705, dated the 14th of December, 1883; and No. 1637 of the 10th of September, 1883.
In the first we notice a Tamil translation of the By-laws of the Matara Sanitary Board. Another Tamil notice regards the sale of land in Anuradhapura.
20

The second Gazette mentions one W.J.Mendis of Madampe who publicizes his appointment as a Sinhala language notary Sinhala in the Katugampola Korale of Kurunegala District. This notice proves interesting: although Mendis has been appointed a Sinhala notary in in a predominantly Sinhalese District, he has given notice in Tamil as well.
The third Gazette contains notices from the Kachcheris of Galle and Matale regarding claims to land. These show that Tamil as well as Sinhala was used throughout the country. (Cf. appendices 1,2 and 3).
Beyond the prevalence of Tamil throughout Ceylon, the government actively encouraged region-specific linguistic representation. In 1904, one Mr.Taldena was occupying the post of Ratamahatmaya in the Panama Pattu of the Eastern Province. During the year, the Government Agent for the Eastern Province, Mr. E.F. Hopkins, paid a visit to the province and found the area's people to be Tamil speakers. He also found that the Ratamahatmaya, Mr.Taldena, proved unable to perform his duties in Tamil: neither could he converse with the area people nor could he maintain records in Tamil. Although Hopkins, the Government Agent, gave Mr.Taldenaseveral chances to study Tamil, the Agent's efforts were of no avail. Finally, the Government Agent served a charge-sheet upon the Ratamahatmaya which called upon Taldena to give reason why his services should not be terminated for not being able to discharge his duties in Tamil, the language of his area's people.
As a merciful alternative to dismissal, permission was granted to Mr.Taldena to retire quietly. Commenting on this, E.F.Hopkins, Eastern Province's Government Agent observed that:
... . .In January, two important native appointments were made. Mr.Gilbert Canagasabai was appointed Vanhiah of Panama Pattu in succession to the Ratamahatmaya, who was permitted to retire. This division is now almost entirely Tamil, and its administration by a Sinhalese Ratamahatmaya was unsatisfactory.
During the British regime, even justice's administration employed Tamil. Summons were served in Tamil to Tamil-speaking witnesses:
There will be total miscarriage of justice if parties to a case are not given the opportunity to testify in their own language. Even summons which contains (sic) intimation of the case should be in the language of the parties concerned.2
21

Page 16
That Tamil was also used for judicial purposcs speaks for the general trend under colonial rule: despite colonialism's manifold miscrcancics, it crpetrated no discrimination in usageber'eer the two indigenous languages, Sinhala and Tamil. Not only did Tamil enoy the same status as Sinhala, but its official usage along with Sinhala was strongly recommended, as we shall see when we investigate legislative rulings.
NOTES
Hopkins, E.F., Administration Report for 1905- Eastern Province, p.
2 File on Nctary A.S.Warnakulasingam
(Lot EP 6/3695 - 0869 - Dept. of National Archives).
22

。呜l *ಸ್ತ್ರ-+ „-rii.j;შუ***",! yr ail + r'.* F.
'E'II', li
r...', r in r ...! ! ! ! ... ', 1 - d. 1.- .
Lili o
r2, i , rifio
Ir ii ii 1
FITTI I 1 gr: "LP- ,
- Jul.
ni T F F F நாசி
ܗ - TFE IF; +5 # If-"":"+ தவி . PL. L.
ل T T الة" ليتم في في بي سي : 1 - في
: ' .. ‘’ r. + r * * , 17;:
ா, 7744?" iii11 111*
khtog,
... .
nii الأمثلين ، 11، يتسع ديقري Jill. Luf, (juho: #ಣೆ:} ?; n, li: ,
ir . , gan Pilyn y 4 ti, ffurf.
2...;... " is? * är "r af:
grటి.ళీ, గి-" += ஒ: பார்ாழி
m Its II
rifiini L.F. F.
in If .re.i? Të, i ri i . . . " ۱۰. له په مينې te, LuLr, foi ...-Fi F." .הנ"ל יהrn+1* ரே :பசி- L. i. L. L. 4:ங்கித் I ii r iir 1 : I اثا ( I است: تسا ـ أسابي = قراها صلة if ...if E if '' தி.ஜி பார்ச்சி: in irri". " r r ,, r r , , # Fil-lirio, டிரிபு وقال = بلدة . تم பூர்தி rajಿ பூதி ரி T. a. lju - 7 LIF ,
r" # ti ”Lj". -" து ர்+? ? է մեն: أدت اثة آل مخال العدو. يق طالعة 1 قام فريق ان مع قري لم fr f: n T أن تتم في يوم في 11 في تي i . . па г. п ri, it if في. في ع ني +ui சிதம் +++ ***** .ப்ேபர்ே či r Jej ul مخلد آدمyفلڈ لمi! I u I r I I iffi li ப+ந்+ 3.ಟೆಸಿಫಿಕ್ಸ್ II. LITE, jati
I in 4. Ti i
1Ïr॥#
Et af Lai A. L.
r7, l'ero ಸrrir • ಗೌನಿ r:#h •t படும் ನಿ॥P೬೩ fly- ந்ேத 144 infrä ஆங்கி வி ,F=بعد آپ؟ آ r I ii gw i ii J li ldef fifi, """" cartuff I#? iப்பரிங் . fisi தங்ாப்பிரகாசங் *** -? படிஅள்,பீடு
# audiq.Fಳಿ!
-iar tFF1 iunn í IIrگی |ir F - ',' -- Ti i " '' 'ቶ ,፣* ir vyr. E, F
ப்ேபரே, ா, 14
7. சா டிர்
11ಿ' +" சோ
ייתיויי, י.ד.. ۴ آبان t + i بالا புத் நம்சேர்து ii iii Ħiel" ir ·ಸಿ ಎgy1 ಕ್ಷೌಸಿ? El 4: - ೬ || * ஆக்ாேர்த பூ في .r أقيقة ل ஆரிேன் nă#?:-tyle ة 3ئيليi?it", 11 iu și தொரு ய் ாருங்கு W§iቅ r## ஒருது .ே பதி и Ј. Јн ா?' வரி:
. ..-ாழுச் ஆப்பிங் டர் | ***'; : : : "+ I loi
r بلدية ق. م. 1 - أزمة ا' = آمد۔آ + ئ + ,
gi.iii,ii ui ii r 7 "i Jrir ***"
rririi, „ry. Ti i ' 'T ாடு
### சத ே ...) Inft
Fuq il ir "rr il-Fr" | நியப PL-|- FF"'IJF அர்ரி: yr... / W T = :::: * '''
;. I. - aliar lă 1 ו"דופן፮ " "
i is P r rtg ாேக் டிபூபும்ே. '
ne of r 1 i Fi ! ", 7 F-2) - மார் :
= -
ந
Li. నీyLi , ॥
y.L.P. J.L. f. ." F .ے
, | முரோம்
- i i
1.அடது. 1 ـ " " و هم : ة يعيس .
: கத" பூ ஃ: f التاج التي كانت "مي 1 # frå, tiu r. w Fiji J J
நீர் பட்; 7irru Fiaٹا۔ 3۔ عشقi !
ii = ii.r i
பிர்பச்,ே ! நஃ11ம் :
காப்பங்றே சார் 4: ' "-"اما" آن ۴۹ = آنرا تا هم با فرق نام = i : int i ஒருவரால் பிர Sirr, 1.5 T is """
த :த்*, நீர்த்தே" - " Air is - متقنة عمله - Ti " IT -" li ji itட ஒir 1" - م = 15 نیriLi * + "داد""
usyt r Figi, '*' : '''" । ।
iJr'ı i: Fl-i-FF ÇE" :* ஈேபு Liri, iiLii li l
قاة" تموز - 1 في الريش . שT,
P. f::Lہ:بھا. آiu.i L -1 H = ":"F ! بولن.rیم =
ኔ " l.... * ''ኗ ና፡
r? r: ' A gi.:Y iri" - ċi; "ே க்தி
nurse ritute Lillint ir "för. ***
#1:1f 7al -E „Y : , , : L' ஆள்ே 31: *
f: செபா n.** * , 3: ஏாங்கூர் பிப்ப"ே . Tir, rr - 2u I rr "H-h" LJL-Le", " . சிாம்.
• : திங்-பார்"
I I' ! . படத்தி பேர்பர்.
*ፍ፦፡ነሮ፣”ዛT"oj''*! lurs: Лг 1 "L =
1 TIL , on 4, soir". التوددا من أن ".
" ' " '
- " C1-f: Fi: F: Il ت:!: ، په. پ1. م
تعتمد التي تمثيل . قرر ا". - 1 = 1 "്, ?பற்கு"ஃப با طالبانان آملی این
:::ே சந்தோர் : r" . "F."
வெந்நீர்ப்பம்
பிட த்ரீ.ாள் L."
ார்ச் *品
ஈசிடரிம் விாரர். ا" نایف آباد اtill 1 الیایی
7.tr." La For
"ச்ச." 1." ம" "ஆ-: ,"1" لم يتمE
£"T. pi (?:.. "°i oriety " ","."

Page 17
ITI" I PI & II
rt i L. E. I rit: = i = r = "... - - i.
.H. H جیل ----------
I
. . . . . . .i F . yıl | F | ..., F.T 4۔ iمل ہو تi'
ܨܒ* L'IL L. TIL I-Fir- i. i. Fr. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . = u ... + " " ,11F E-T in ; F۔ ?
a F
LLLLSLLLLCLLL AkS SS LLLL KS LLL SL Hi S S
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rnسی قn != IIrff"=!
| r || ॥ 1. - * ق ، تم 甲。。呜,甲 .
". . . .
. . . . . . .
uh + " i ly." F ": IF i i I
,
I " , r, ! ت"_T i. 3. ";!'' "፡ '... i.
- OTeeTLLT L SY S LLL S S eT TST S TL Tt L S S S HuS
or Frn-yin.
r , - - - . "E.I. ill ---- g த்ரிபு- i *r f*
- Fl for L-Fon i
ா, III i II F . டிே *FF,
ir fyri: ,
* ====
l- Niriet, numri li jirrr t I ii n ir-"r" u "air7 -? a Finr: Roří Clue, v i - - -irir li rrif-r , I r T Tv,
டி.திட ம் یr=F if = " ni Ir. * - E - i. I FA L- - فi[j]FirآE பூர்: 1*კუ r. Las Puff . , F ir Ir.* I *'. Fro : " " -1 - Fay E f '4rrı eşfırırdı? fiki'ye ç: ****fi புதுப்ாப்பூசேபூத சுத்தோரி ,' " i i II 1۔ تم r ... د خrعرnF . ,"پنr + یقif Errinf ی == darl F a'r Plaid ஆய்ப்பப்பர் F-I 1 it. Full riri i p ∈ F. மிங்வா କ୍ରୁ if Fr r = بال: . . ." F الی * செரீரிருப்பதாலும் இவர்டI: "" சாரப்பட்ட சாகி அப்பரசே சுவர் 1-சி. 11 rrrrr Mei Yves zu Grrr.:I Fir TT 15. க்ரிப் போட்டாத பித்தசார்வீச்சிப் rr*ყე = ー」町 『"| கூ செர்ர்rப்பட்ட கி.டாே சிy': வ அசருேக்கேற்கச் சேர்பப் பட். L.f. க்காவிப்பதியர் சேமிபாட் ... it it is Lillery Fr n núLull o for Ll l.aplir na L., 75ë tri fr,i ri i 17 ா பே ர், ரிச்சரொர்கள் if it, i.r.l. r க்ஆேரே - j - Ĥropa proy-Y FL La „ger? "J" Pof a'sup" stn 重。疆 நிசதியும், rif i'r llyf' ஆங்கி -
rach ) i la seyili fL-iLofoob" J Jr, ** -rn Jari zu flio ""iz" st F" அம, . ". பாரிங், க.அ.அ. இப் பார்த்தொ" சக ரீ.
ரோட்கோட்டர் ಕೆ?
.- ". |.Eዛ" # ir" l, |ыч in "ii:
- -
| r "நா ''ናil L! L. "Fi '5
『. " " H II. ili ir J . ." " P " ni F.II
i II : * I - || ||
it " ' " "ሃ",'' *፡Í ..” F Tiri 3.
* r = - - F - F - irr. F. --F r'); Lnt r . . . . . ,* - ، ة***,"",...,r F - L.n.-ri,
. - - . . '- " ". - - - , , , ,
==
WW". „), 5, Fi:', MgF. ity |
::* Ir - 1 rajá:೫+F gua
- R -- E
a y:Artin : if its ಪ್ಲ? ۹ ،آباد ". ırır L'ತೆ ரக்பரிதி مينا فدعية تت ini : ril - raih rrifu rii air சித்து டிசொாருந்படி Corr ية قسنة م. يتدلجا
ܒ
IIF I i II * 4. i = . y . și Esy IV J Our Li
r = - = قطة 1 + 1 = 1 في । ।।।।
عليها في نتج مادة) وهي من دج - م. من r. '' - F f. Fg - 15 -ird Fra r I • lu 7 d. I ...i... '.. va 5 i.-tir ?.u." Jarafu,?i நிருப்பு " ..நீ ம்ே.ார்.ஆர் கசக் கேளிர்தசொ Ae eeLLeSCC eLHkSkkT TYS S0 kkAkO TL TTTA AAA Lr:AF-ið. . . . * in n * förf? Från
sirun.' rillar. senir,
་ :ཟླ
III. i I'; IF - " - قف
TI . F. Fr. ட்ர்ங் * s u ii ii I r 1 - r r | |,|- محی اټ = l",
* ಕ್ಲೆ: r:J'r' ' * -7r Pu?F,
... tr :r:: it: சர்ச்சராக டி. ர் தெரி.
---- --- HHH
i..:1 1. ஆங்கி Fié ¥-+? ங் # Pro 1.133; 't su Lilo 4. Rera, 37-ji ', # pri la rejiñu of Foo," + r r r ir i'r Ffurf, es y Ffi sil Gla lun . I F1 i Flow arh يتعين kir: +1r41*"turi # # #####ut) '೩|| பு:பேரேங்க பிரசித் ரேரிகள்டபடங்ங் து சிட்ரி "திசி" கம்பீர்ாக ஒரு சங்கத்த* உரே, தேர்தும்ேஆம்பர, திர்அா ம் ஆள் E ETIH Iri ilir i FBIJгRuff MRтан PD Ljf Tici குழஒர கச்சேரிசிங் த.அாக ம் ஆங்+ர் rwirnii r ii??au Tariffir rrbu li FaüLjúfu er ú, a.-kré= Li.ges iðu á
ಸ್ನೈ: : "r - - - ாப், ாடி.செப்ரேய், : பிரிச்சூாடர்பை sia. = ظالقات. . :' |சக்தித்த்தார் ب : " كي " "
-- ::: ட்பின்பூசம், சார்ப் x ::::::செர்ன்தேர்சாக்க நீர் ஆதிதிருதர்மூக்பூர்த்ம்பித்ரிட் பொனடிெஆரர ம்ே. டத்தில் டின் ம் ஆண்டு இன்டர்ட்ட்ங்கிருசறாக்கப்பூர்தி பார்தழி : E ܒܶܒܩܼܒܫܵܐ = ====ن= = نے ح =ط؟ . T litri II i litir i rialair rai TL, Linusk, I. Turisd.o * "" "

, TI:11:: If I Hm. r. - - . . . . . -- F - - ... = r m .1 P r: - , , F. : E فن = - ܐ ■
-- m
- *。”、 - CLJJSu LLeHSJJA qSLLu uKTTLYTquu qTTSS TqeSeSAeTT L JYeeLLL LLL0LSLu TTTTL LqS
ப்ேரசி. 5. T.; 는 = all." "r- تلق # T * - :-r.r F.
జ్ఞాః . SeSTSSYSS S0LL AHYSqSSeLSS 0 LLLLL SLLSSTTTLSS YATLTTAAASSe AK LLSLSAi ASAS SSSuSuSAS0S ܒ" ق م = قلة . ۔ ۔ - = i = "" -- ع - -
ALLL S LLLLS LqT eSAJ ie uS kLOeee eSS S SS AAS S SAAS S تھے ۔ت۔"rب سے ج گرہی ہ* لیا 1- = :"۔ ... - - - - - - - - - LSSSL L L LLLLL S LLL S Ai AAKKkAiAiAASLLL LL SiLLLS TASS S SSAAA S iuueS A SAS TTLTAeqe SqqJAAA AAAA AAAq LLASK KS AA eeTTTe eAqASKKSeeueTTATAAASu uK eLS AAAA AAAASS
is ...a... ." "::... r - -
-- Filië- ... - - - ". . . . . . == ε, οι its ef "-" * ఎడ్" --
: +---- .L - منشدي ". تسجين = I الداعية" "- 미 }
: Ge ------ # -*- IF le. , F.F.' u -
L. : : E TI -- n. - , ) : Fi 5Ꮠ Ꭵ ; L!- "+4-o------- EL TIL لغة ."ت : يا - - - : i. i. f-- - - - 4 : "" (LEJ 2 كل سدية تاة. Er 1 E."
: i = = = = E-------- - !! !? !!! :- - - - - -- Elis- i. L.
5+. Fl--- EF li u li id Pali it fill Lira-ry g g: e do: "il" : l:5 ఈ :- Gru r . G.-L.: = е: }* 54і і f = iii - E' ifri First- I lift, i.e.
m 尊 I i ii i قي I-I". Gir- , tr. tյ Ա - :: 1 shi: . . -:--= Larerirvi.
ருபு: Full- FT. F. Four 미 ص - |
== = L R , TTLLLLLTS S L TAA AeeA LLLLTLK C C C 0K Ꭲ *Ꮞl i iਸ TIL f. F.LukiG.Ly! La Fel,F I ga „I ; F: T4: Fil-: GLEEL ] П .
i.i. E*:Fd LE El . c. nr. Fury
r Wr ü፥! ; Loiso--2 போபடி - Ed. L. ALL LEEF rich 미
r ಗ್ವಿ! బ్లాక--+ +===-3 kl. E "TE-- ! ኃ" :5 - L: 5" o lo FFF Full г. с г. ,
ت"ت i--- ... få i E
* * * "... ." مسح تد - - -
Eui fi la "Tf F. ...L. TE' +3+ E-5 zur Ei a .. Trajtur, r
in ات r اًE" يتي ఆT+ళూ - 量 ' F. *۴ ہتھیـ م - । ###### L" I EL Gaj FFF - L. F. TL LLALLTTeT TkeA LAAAATTT ASekeeTTTTkTT LSLLLeAe eeLe LLLutit TtTTAA K LSLLLAMuSL
- ی + ""۔ ALLLLLLLLue TTTTTSSST TueTLSLLLq AATLLLLeueL eekLk kuTTT TTALAALLLLLALLLL u S eTT AAAA LLL A ASS
நரி பேர்க் - er sort- for Loir- FrP rv rw Riri.-.-.
serior FL. A cred ill.iii. : ?--Fri, t ki. L-i-hrv. . -.- || P.-F. f., G 1 raL ifriñ, r*->» eÉ; Frou 4 : .
-e'i ci i Fife, G -- Te - =میل = r" LS S sHeeLLL T S ASSAeSLLLLLLLL L LLOOL T L TATTTT tTLSuuuS தீர்ள்:ே r* , fille- * =rn- iii. போருட்டு s-ras : : et f LLLTeuL TLTTLLLLLLLLkSkLLLATTT ALTTLLL TTT L A ATAtTT ttLLL CkSAAAe KS KS TeLL TTTkke TLLLLLkkeBeTST TATTASA qA CLLTTTtTTLT LLLkLLee LATTSTTLLTLLLLS ப்பாது இதனூர் நடப்பர் ஒசிள்ே சாகிதர:-
FTF. E. TR = r - Feel Eius L. LMF- figvio. و نا است . عل 宽 |试 Jir FF. Erää கோட்டபடிாேனபாடிய Cf"L' u kt gror 士 ! ப- GUELä. சேபம் լի է: Լեյ
ELDRAJEa For FL LIŭ - H Ferritor 13: --Da Lr. LeLe. ! كل ذلك قد Gin L. Furt. է 11H -- LEIL EL until
g=égrl-Air" st வரபிசியின்படி அந்த இடங்கா ஈர்பாருக்கிர்ேராசெர்ாதிட்டம் பண்ார்பிருப்பதா சாங்கர்ள் பெருமதியை பெர்ரச்சேர்கிதாக வைப்பந்பி டவிாம் LLLTLALALTTATLLLLLLL LLLLL LTTTTTeT LLATTTS AA TTS
பேத்குங்த்ர"கிக்கு டர்ந்தபேசும்னக சதுபேரும் சமூகங்ங்ாது அபாய3ஈடய காரி Lu l rp Frífi As-k-iy "L- 351,! Jusin"# Le L3 Geog5 மார்க்கு Liar, ETT ாாமூாதிாயிங் பொர்ப்பட்ெேசாரிங் செர்ாே கேண்டு மங்ாமங் ரந்தர்பானிக்குப் GLE.Pf7drastrt ELSri Llumr jlinr ii I LI: - Yard LuljĖp är regji ësait Fier Liliško, kg சொங்கேண்டியற
ார். ராஜ், மோபிர்
LIFAT forf, G-A-Y. SY FT Lð all is. ாரிங்ஜர் வெர்ன்மென்ம் ரவள்ர்.

Page 18
CHAPTER II
SINHALA AND TAMIL AS OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
As prelude to representative governance and participatory democracy, the British introduced the Legislative Council, an innovation soon followed by the State Council. As advisory council to the Governor, the Legislative Council was constituted of both official and unofficial members, whereas the State Council proved to be a more democratic body in which members, most of whom were elected by universal franchise, could express their views freely. Following the overall modus operandi for the country’s administration, the business of the State Council was conducted in English.
The first move to make Sinhalese and Tamil the official languages of the country came from a steadfast statesman, Mr. G.K.W.Perera, Matara's State Council Member. On the fifth of July, 1932, he gave notice of the following motion in the State Council:
This Council resolves -
(1) that no person shall in future be appointed into the Civil or Clerical Service who fails to reach a high standard in Sinhalese or Tamil.
(2) that no officer in the Civil or Clerical Service shall receive promotion until and unless he showed proficiency in Sinhalese or Tamil.
(3) that no person shall be appointed as Police Magistrate to preside in the higher Criminal Courts unless he proved his ability to conduct and record proceedings in Sinhalese and Tamil.
(4) that lawyers be permitted to conduct criminal trials in
Sinhalese and Tamil.
However, as the Council was dissolved in 1935, this motion toward equitable use of the indigenous languages lapsed and no debate took place.
26

Eleven years later, on June 22, 1943, Mr.J.R. Jayewardene gave a different expression to this notion of the worth of indigenous language usage, first hazardcd by Perera, in the following motion in the State Council:
That with the object of making Sinhalese the official language of Ceylon within a reasonable number of years this Council is of opinion [sic] -
(a) that Sinhalaese should be made the medium of instruction
in all schools;
(b) that Sinhalese should be made a compulsory subject in all
public examinations;
(c) that legislationshould beintroduced to permit the business
of the State Council to be conducted in Sinhalese also;
(d) that a Commission should be appointed to choose for translation and to translate important books of other languages into Sinhalese;
(e) that a Commission should be appointed to report on all steps that need to be taken to effect the translation from English into Sinhalese.2
When his Sinhalese-favoring motion was taken up in debate on May 24, 1944, Jayawardene explained his motivation for an emphasis on a single indigenous language:
...the official language is English, and that is why this country is always in danger of being governed by a small coterie who go through those English schools, whereas the vast majority who go through the Sinhala and Tamil schools must always be in the position of hewers of wood and drawers of water.....
He underlines here the power wreaked by a language being termed “official”. More pertinently, however, on this same day of debate, Jayawardene issues an emendation to his earlier emphasis upon Sinhalese:
...I wish to speak a word of explanation with regard to my desire to include Tamil also. I had always the intention that Tamil should be spoken in the Tamil-speaking Provinces, and
27

Page 19
that Tamil should be the official language in the Tamilspeaking Provinces.
We might note that Tamil begins to have an "also" status here: it begins to possess the quality of an afterthought, as though it were a small rider attendant upon the passage of Sinhala as an official language. Both above and below, we can see Jayawardene struggling with the basic principles of equitable representation, with its initial criterion of statistical power: -
...as two-thirds of the people of this country speak Sinhalese, I had the intention of proposing that only Sinhalese should be the official language of the Island; but it seems to me that the Tamil community and also the Muslim community, who speak Tamil, wish that Tamil also should be included on equal terms with Sinhalese.
The self-contradictions entailed in this majoritarian conceptofdemocracy . will produce what later language rights proponents will call a tyranny by numbers, one which effectively quiets the voices of entire electorates.
In Jayawardene's case, he argues that one "great fear" arises, ostensibly related to cultural preservation: as only three million people in the world speak Sinhalese, he continues, the language would suffer or be "entirely lost in the time to come" were Tamil to be placed on "equal footing" with it in Sri Lanka.
He continues by emphasizing the strong influence within Sri Lanka of Tamil culture, films, and a literature "used by over forty million." Initially Jayawardene considered such influence "detrimental to the future of the Sinhalese language," yet he still wishes to appear to include the Tamilspeaking community:
...if it is the desire of the Tamils that Tamil also should be given an equal status with Sinhalese, I do not think we should bar it from attaining that position. This House, I am sure, will vote with me that English should be deposed, from its position as the official language of the country and Sinhalese and Tamil, the ancient languages of our people should be made the official languages of Lanka.
Jayawardene's conclusion before the State Council was that ademocracy must represent the voices of its people. Mr.V.Nalliah, Member for
28

Trintomalee - Batticaloa, moved an amendment to the motion to make Sinhale se and Tamil the official languages of the country. 4 Mr.R.S.S.Gunawardena, Member for Gampola, having seconded the amendment, added the need for official legitimacy accorded to a heterogenous population's languages:
...It is impossible, in the nature of things, that one language should be made the official language. The moment Sinhalese is suggested as a subject, all the other Tamil-speaking good people would, probably legitimately, feel that their language has been relegated to the background and that their interests have been relegated to the background and that their interests have been neglected. But so long as we find two sections of the community speaking two languages, it is necessary that both languages should be recognised as official languages. That would be a solution of our difficulties.
In a suffusion of similar sentiment, Mr.T.B.Jayah, a nominated Member, ended by marking the coincidence of pre-colonial nationalism, of "those who have a love for this country," with an indigenous dual-language policy:
I do not see any reason why, in a country like this, where the large majority of the people are Sinhalese and Tamils these two languages should be relegated to the background. ... I think it is but right that those who have a love for this country should insist on making Sinhalese and Tamil also official languages. 6
Jayah's expression of crowd-galvanizing patriotism may have spurred the then-Member for Point Pedro, Mr. G.G. Ponnambalam, to examine more closely the problems resulting from monocultural definitions of patriotism, Ponnambalam chose to cite the all-too-real and contemporaneous horrors of World War II:
Some time ago, even the Leader of the State Council was unwitting enough to deliver himself of this function: that he looks forward to a time where there will be one official language, one race, and one religion...It is that which we must bitterly oppose when a whole world war is being fought to kill this canard of a superior race, or a Herrenvolk in Europe. We do not want a "Herrenvolk" in Ceylon and the language of the
29

Page 20
"Herrenvolk" to be imposed upon the other sections of the people of this country. That is the position. That is why we opposed this (Sinhala-only motion.7
Mr.S.W.R.D.Bandaranaike addcd that, inconsidering the Tamil-Sinhala amendment to Jayawardene's original motion, he had "no personal objection to both these languages being considered official languages," nor did he see any "particular harm or danger or real difficulty arising out of the amendation." 8 Later, he would continue this non-commital tone in his abstention from voting on the Tamil-Sinhala amendment.
Before this, however, Jayawardene had conceded the amendment. He added that if one investigated statistical reports, in "two out of the nine provinces in this country, in the north and east, over ninety percent speak Tamil." He continued to declare the case for enfranchiscment of Tamilspeaking populations: "we must not refuse the people in those Provinces Tamil as an official language.'
Following Jayawardene's concession, in an ironic repetition of numbers, the amendment supporting both Tamil and Sinhalese as the country's official languages was carried by a two-thirds majority, with Bandaranaike's abstention a hovering reminder of the difficulty the issue posed to Council members.
In pursuance of this dual-language decision by the State Council the acting leader moved:
That -
(a) A select Committee of the State Council be appointed to consider and report on the steps necessary to effect the transition from English to Sinhalese and Tamil with the object of making Sinhalese and Tamil the official languages of the country.
(b) The Committee to consist of -
(1) The Legal Secretary
(2) The Hon. C.W. W. Kannangara
(3) Mr.T.B.Jayah
30

(4) Mr.J.R.Jayewardene
(5) Mr.S.Natesan
(6) Mr.A.Ratnayake
Having elected Jayewardene Chairman, the Committee set out to gather information both by holding public sittings in Colombo and other districts and by entertaining written submissions. Once it had finalised its report, the Jayewardene Committee issued its findings, as Sessional Paper No.XXII
of 1946 on the seventeenth of December, 1946.
The population statistics which the Committee furnished are as follows:
Race Population to Percentage to
the nearest total population 1000
Sinhalese (Low country and Kandyan) 4,637,000 69.6 Ceylon Tamils 826,000 12.4 Ceylon Moors & Malays 393,000 5.9 Indian Tamils 682,000 10.3 Other Indians including Indian Mocrs 69,000 1.0 Other Races 12,000 0.8
Considering these 1946 statistics, the Committee noted:
The proportion according to language may therefore be reckoned as 69.6%. Sinhalese - speaking, 28.6% Tamilspeaking.
In what we can see now as a retroactively ironic date, given the 1956 events unforeseeable by the 1946 Committee, the Committee appointed January 1, 1957, as the deadline for the transfer to Sinhala and Tamil as Ceylon's official languages. 12 Committee members also recommended a progress review by a Commission in 1951.3Most pragmatically, perhaps, implementation would depend on a single recommendation: the training of Sinhala and Tamil stenographers and typists and the need to order at least two thousand Sinhalese and Tamil typewriters.14, 15
Perhaps the most well-meaning plans suffer the vagaries of the political process. The State Council system was summarily dissolved in view of the
3.

Page 21
proposed parliamentary system, for which elections would be held at the end of 1947. Hence, in a preview of obstacles to come, it proved impossible to debate the 1946 Committee's well-intentioned report.
On the fourth of February, 1948, Ceylon gained independence and the country entered a new era. In 1954 Sir John Kotelawela, then Prime Minister, paid an official visit to Jaffna. At a reception accorded to him at Kokuvil Hindu College, Kotelawela promised to confirm both Sinhala and Tamil as Ceylon's official languages.
Yet upon his return to Colombo, Kotelawela was pressurized to deny his Jaffnastatement, an unfortunate force to which he even more unfortunately conceded. At this juncture, an understandable misgiving began to mar the hopes of Tamil-speaking people: given political backtracking, what could the future hold for the official use of Tamil language within Sri Lanka?
Having recognized the uncertain turn taken by Kotelawcla, by the nineteenth of October, 1955, Dr. N.M. Perera, a Member of Parliament (MP) for Ruwanwella, had proposed the following private member's motion:
That in the opinion of this House, the Ceylon (Constitution) Order in Council should be amended forthwith to provide for the Sinhalese and Tamil languages to be state languages of Ceylon with parity of status throughout the Island. 16
Perera here forwarded a vision of unity in diversity, and the need to work toward such a vision. He underlined a parliamentary consensus of a nation united, "notwithstanding the diverse cultures we have...the diversities of languages. Notwithstanding, maybe, the traditions we have had."
Foreseeing the risks of effectively disenfranchising a sizable sector, Perera held before the assembled parliamentarians an unignorable electoral CaTTOt:
...I feel that it is only by assuring the minorities of that equality of status that we can cultivate their goodwill and get them to work in unity for developing this country - the late Right Honorable D.S.Senanayake said that our essential task was to create a nation and buildup our people not with one language but with two or perhaps three.
32

Herc we might notice Percra's use of the phrase "our people", a concept well-reconciled with his proposed "two or perhaps three' languages. According to Perera, diverse equality could be maintained.
But a government thus composed should understand the rights which equality entails. "What parity of status means," explained Perera, "is a recognition of a right that each individual has to be governed in the language he understands." That the government itself should speak to the populations it serves in the vernacular language proved a key element toward legitimizing such a language's status. 7
Perera went further to explain that democracy should depend less upon absolute statistical yardsticks and more upon an abiding situational fairness and ethics.
"The test of a democratic decision," said Perera:
...is the morality of the law. It is not merely a counting of heads, but whether, in point of fact, the minorities are given a full consideration of their points of view. It means giving full weight to the right of the minority communities. That is what democracy mcans. 18.19
Apparently Perera's definitions were strong enough to convince Mr.Edmund Samarakkody, MP for Dehiowita, to second the Tamil-Sinhala motion and speak in its support.20 From a vastly different perspective, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike fully opposed the motion and went so far as to issue an amendment to delete Tamil, thereby keeping Sinhala only as an official language.2
The House Speaker then readaversion amended toward Bandaranaike's ideas. Bandaranaike having accepted this amendment.22 Mr. W. Dahanayake, Galle MP, seconded this constriction toward a Sinhala-Only policy.23
Having been initiated as a private member's motion, the debate was adjourned. Yet as the political process took its blind toll, the motion was not implemented. Since Parliament itself was soon after dissolved, the motion, amended to Bandaranaike's preference, also lapsed. No further debate could take place.
43

Page 22
What we can see from the nature of the four governmental debatcs of 1932, 1944, 1946, and finally 1955 is that a certain consistency reigns in the domain of issues discussed. At each juncture, those politicians concerned raised the question of whether a nation in formation could draw both conceptual and legal boundaries around the vision of a pluralistic and equally enfranchised society. At each juncture, the special subdivision of xenophobia that should rightfully not be called fear of the stranger but of one's neighbor recurred regarding the loss of some aspect of one culture or another within a heterogeneous milieu. At each juncture, the spectre of a nation which actively disbarred a large member of civil society from equal participation arose.
These issues would not disappear in debates thereafter. Rather, they would either migrate into the subliminal debates carried out by leading politicians or else be reincarnated into nearly unrecognizable mutations, led by a parade of more politically acceptable concepts and blandishments.
Yet all the while, pulsing underneath, core questions remained: what responsibility and human rights are at stake in a democracy's representation of its citizens' languages? What form and vehicle would best implement such responsibility? How should a democracy founded within a multilingual society best proceed in terms of its official language policy?
NOTES
Hansard, State Council, 5th July 1932, p. 1641.
2 Hansard, State Council, 22nd June 1943, p. 1024.
3 Hansard, State Council, 24th May 1944, pp.747 - 748.
4 Ibid, p.759
5 Ibid, p.760
6 Ibid, p.762
Ibid, p.765
8 Ibid, p.8ll
9 Ibid, p.813

1
12
13
14
16
17
8
19
20
2
22
23
Minutes of the State Council of Ceylon, 20th September, 1945-Item
29, p.42
Sessional Paper NO.XXII of 1946, p.9
Ibid, p.9, para 20.
Ibid - p.27
Ibid
Ibid, p.9, para 20.
Parliament of Ceylon, Hansard, Vol.23, Cols. 572/573
Ibid., Cols. 610/611
IBid - Columns 612/63
Ibid, p.577
Ibid, Col.626
Ibid, - Col. 684/685
Ibid, Col.686
Ibid, Col.688
35

Page 23
CHAPTER IV
SNHALA ONLY AS OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
As the 1956 General Elections drew near, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) formed an electoral alliance with several other opposition parties, banded together under a common front named Mahajana Eksath Peramuna. The SLFP was led by the late Mr. S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike who had cut his ties with the United National Party (UNP). He declared that were he returned to power, within twenty-four hours he would register Sinhalaas the single official language of Sri Lanka.
Agitated by Bandaranaike's election promise, the UNP also entered the Sinhala-Only race. Though both the SLFP and the UNP claimed to represent mainstream politics, both were prepared to sacrifice minority interests and rights at the seductive altar of power.
Such sacrifice did not come without protest. During the Parliament of 1952 through 1956, one long-standing member of the UNP, the Member for Kankesanturai was the late Mr. Suppiah Natesan, a world-famous and distinguished scholar who had entered politics in the interest of helping form a united nation. When the United National Party geared itself to enter the Sinhala-Only race, thereby dismantling its very foundation, Natesan resigned from his Ministerial Portfolio of Posts and Information and from the Party that had helped launch him.
On the twentieth of January, 1956, Natesan tendered his resignation. In a heartrending appeal, he expressed his disappointment with the UNP's decision to make Sinhala the singular official language. Regarding independence, he said that the Tamils "did not bargain that with the cessation of foreign rule there would be an imposition of another language on them in place of English." He accurately identified that the Tamil language had been relegated to the margins of the country's political scheme.
To sit by passively would be to sit in error:
36

No self-respecting Tamil can allow this...ancient language of great cultural distinction to be reduced to an inferior position in this country.
Here Natesan conflates self-identity with national direction. Having shared breath with Sinhala-speaking communities during nation-state formaticn, the Tamil-speaking population possessed unarguable identity with the nation. Natesan cites the extensive contributions, both ancient and recent, made by Tamils to the formation of then-Ceylon. "Some of our Tamil leaders fought valiantly, more for their Sinhalese brethren than for their own kith and kin," he says, singling out those leaders who had fought for the country's Independence:
These leaders) are honoured names - honoured by the Sinhalese people no less than the Tamil people. Could you, Mr.Speaker, imagine that Ramanathan and his brother Arunachalam, when they fought for freedom of Ceylon, would have even thought that the time would come when the language which they spoke, the language of which they were masters, the language of which they were proud, would be relegated to an inferior position in this country?
Consider momentarily this idea of mastering a language. Cofounders of Ceylon's emerging, if fluctuating, sense of modern nationhood were to be, as it were, disbarred from their own legacy of mastery. Such barricading proves impossible, Natesan continues, as the Tamil language itself cannot be extricated from the country's history.
"History shows," says Natesan:
...that the Tamil language has enjoyed an important position in this country not only in the areas where Tamil had an undisputed sway but in other areas which could be called normally Sinhalese areas.
Citing ancient markers such as the aforementioned Lankatilake Vihare and the Gadaladeniya Vihare, wherein Tamil inscriptions relating to land . grants to temples neighbor parallel inscriptions in Sinhalese, Natesan exclaims that "the kings of old, the generous Sinhalese people, thought that an important place should be accorded to Tamil."
37

Page 24
Similarly, Natesan mentions thc indisputable: when such an influential document in the nation's self-identity as the Kandyan Convention was signed, both Sinhalcsc and Tamil names filled the roster.
Having established the two languages' historical intertwining, Natesan refers to the unfairness resulting from a blind obedience to sheerly statistical definitions of democracy: "Democracy does not mean the imposition of majority tyranny. It always stands for justice to the minoritics."
Yet Natesan does not will a justice achieved by any means. He indicates that he speaks not in a "spirit of militancy":
I am not asking the Tamil people to depart from their traditions of moderation but I cannot help saying that if there is to be an imposition of a language on us against our will, resist we must; and resist we will. We will carry on the struggle on the best approved moral lines of resistance.
Following Natesan's cri de coeur, during the General Elections, the "moral line of resistance" which most clearly suggested itself to a NorthEastern Tamil-speaking electorate shaken by the UNP's chauvinist trends was to vote the Federal Party to power. In other districts, Tamil-speaking voters formed large blocs to support the left-inclined parties.
Still, election results showed beachmarks of the chauvinistic wave which had stormed the country. While the whipped UNP survived with a straggling eight Members of Parliament, the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (Peoples' United Front) had been deposited into power.
Further, backed by the SLFP, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike had been elected Prime Minister. In his early days, on the fifth of June, 1956, still seeking to restrict Ceylon's languages to Sinhala, Bandaranaike introduced:2
A Bill to prescribe the Sinhala language as the one official language of Ceylon and to enable transitory provisions to be made.
The Bill was worded as follows:
The Sinhala language shall be the one Official Language of
Ceylon.
38

Provided that where the Minister considers it impracticable to commence the use of only the Sinhalese language for any official purpose immediately on the coming into force of this Act, the language or languages hitherto used for that purpose may be continued to be so used until the necessary change is effected as early as possible before the expiry of the 31st day of December 1960.
During the Parliamentary debate on this Bill, the pleas of both Tamilspcaking leaders and Sinhalese leaders committed to equal representation failed to sway the government's stand. In utter disappointment at the debate's conclusion, the late Dr.Colvin R. de Silva, MP for WellawatteGalkissa, cautioned thc Government that disunity would leave the nation prey for exploitation:
Parity, Mr.Speaker, webclieve is the road to the freedom of our nation and the unity of its components. Otherwise two torn little bleeding States may yet arise of one little State, which has compelled a large scction of itself to treason, ready for the impcrialists to mop up that which imperialism only recently disgorged.
Thc tenderness of Ceylon's recent independcnce would highlight contradictions in its self-conceptualization. Such contradictions would complicatc the requirements foramicable discourse among those so recently liberated.
Moreover, if a plurality of voices within Parliamentary precincts could not affect government decisions, the only recourse would be to continue the debate outside the democratic agency of thc parliamentary body.
In utter frustration, Mr.C.Suntharalingam, M.P. for Vavuniya, told the Prime Minister:
I shall consider that my work is outside and I shall also consider, Mr.Prime Minister, how we should wage this war, this war of justice, this war of righteousness. You are hoping for a united Ceylon. It is a simple matter, Mr. Prime Minister. Do not fear, I assure you, you will have a divided Ceylon with God's grace.
39

Page 25
The only national course which many could foresee was this violent aesthetic of dismemberment, what Natesan had referred to as "two torn little bleeding States." Having dismantled its own national charter by choosing to compete with the SLFP's Sinhala-Only campaign manifesto, the United National Party raised neither a protesting voice nor a voice pleading for adjustments. Rather, choosing to amputate one of the nation's most ancient and significant limbs, its Tamil-speaking population, the UNP voted along with the SLFP Government's decision.
Because of this inter-party competition, this overdetermined Bill, Act Number 33 of 1956, became law with effect from the twenty-fourth of September, 1956.
What we can observe from an examination of the manoeuvering leading to passage of the 1956 Bill is that neither passion for the Sinhalalanguage nor desire for its development had guided the thinking of the Sinhala-Only protaganists. Had such passion been exclusively extant, there would have been no need to relegate Tamil to the margins. Rather, political opportunism had recognized a means for its own self-referential passion: those quick to . employ the specious power of divide et impere could gain quick political mileage among the frustrated rural Sinhala masses.
What politician does not know the worth of promising socioeconomic mobility to the masses? That a majority vernacular would become a means toward village youth gaining, for example, coveted government jobs provided a useful carrot to hang before the electorate. Yet once the SinhalaOnly bill came to be implemented, we know that its proponents' children fled its consequences, having been sent to study in Englishin schools of both the United Kingdom and United States.
By having relegated English as well as Tamil to an inferior position in education, the "patriots" of Sinhala-Only deprived the masses, particularly rural youth, the opportunity of assimilating contemporary learning and knowledge. Such deprivation created a network of social imbalances which only deepened preexisting class difference.
In addition to being an economic weapon, in retrospect Sinhala-Only forms part of a major strategy.
Prof.E.F.C.Ludowyk put the influence of this bill in perspective when he observed:
40

Though Tamil, the language of two million people in Ceylon (if the stateless plantation workers are included) was the spoken language of thirty million in India, its inferior position in Ceylon was no different from that of Sinhalese in relation toeveryday lise. Itsgreaterusein Indiain noway compensated for its degraded position in Ceylon. Danger of South Indian domination was more the product of Sinhalese feelings of guilt than Tamil policy. Sinhala-Only without regard for other language groups in the island could not but be resisted by the Ceylon Tamils - a minority of one million persons who were citizens of Ceylon. Its sharp edge was in its economic point. If there was a larger number of Tamils in the service of the state than in proportion to the numbers in the country, this was due to their greater industry and thrift. 5
Ludowyk here defines the Bill's ground. If all competition arises from an original sense of scarcity, cultural and socioeconomic scarcity proved the appropriate wasteland from which communalist weeds could strangle through panic an entire population. As Ludowyk points out, the Bill's implicit (and perhaps, not entirely redeemable) promise was that its passage would assure Sinhalese abundant privilege in attaining government jobs.
Was such bitter factionalist promise carried out? Only partially, if one looks at the turmoil which the country had to undergo after the enactment of the 1956 Sinhala-Only bill.
The subsequent furor may have spoken to Bandaranaike. Having placed a large number of people under detention and the leaders of the Federal Party, including Members of Parliament, under house arrest, Mr.Bandaranaike then gave notice of a Bill "to make provision for the use of the Tamil language and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto" on the seventeenth of July, 1958.6
On the fifth of August, 1958, in Parliament, Bandaranaike's Bill was taken up for debate. Rejecting the Bill with fellow Lanka Samasamaja Party members, Dr. N.M. Perera issued a statement:
We re-iterate that the only solution for the language problem is one that will give proper official status to the Tamil language. This alone will ensure the unity of this country. However, we are also opposed to the very discussion of this
41

Page 26
Bili in Parliament under conditions where (1) both the Sinhalese-speaking and Tamil-speaking masses are deprived of the democratic right of expressing their attitude to the proposed legislation, and (2) where the elected representatives of a very large section of the Tamils have been detained and deprived of their political freedom. 7
Along with party members M.D. Banda, G.G.Ponnambalam, C.Suntharalingam, and others, Perera walked out of a House which had already symbolically denied his ideas dwelling.
Not wholly deterred, Bandaranaike hastened passage of the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act Number 28, passed in Parliament in 1958.
In supporting the Bill, Mr.Bandaranaike took a philosophical turn. He claimed the existence of competing nationalisms, of one or two "fundamental principles" which prompted him to ask: What is it that we are after?
Are we seeking to establish a Sinhalese imperialism, to forcibly make everybody speak Sinhalese or to establish a Tamil hegemony covering a large part of the world? Let us make quite clear what we want. If what we want is to live here, protecting and safeguarding what is valuable to the Sinhalese people, while giving fair and just recognition to the valuable things of others, so that we can live together as a friendly lot of citizens of this country, working in friendship for the progress of the country as a whole, that the line that we have adopted has been entirely justified...
The vision espoused speaks of a paternalistic desire to wreak justice upon minority rights. We will give "fair and just recognition" to the "valuable things of others." According to Bandaranaike, the higher aim is not dominance but rather a utopian, symbiotic cohabitation - albeit with a clearly hierarchical notion of noblesse oblige - which leads to the "progress of the country as a whole."
In the anti-imperialist mood of post-colonial Ceylon, Bandaranalike
continues by denigrating the entire question of an official language, as well an its relevance to the nation's situation:
42

Many people do not understand what is meant by the term "official language'. That is interpreted in various ways. The Official Language conception is a Western conception. In our country, we had no Official Language as such. Even in many Western Countries, they have no legal Official Language today; it has grown up by practice.
Ironically, Bandaranaike holds forth indigenous claims as a marker of a concept's relevance. Yet he wishes to downplay the fear that such indigenous claim could be used to mark the relevance or legitimacy of an entire sector of the populace. "When you have a language declared by law as the Official Language," he asks rhetorically, "what does it mean?" The answer he gives: that though such a language is recognised only for "necessary official acts," it "does not mean a language that is thrust down the throats of everybody for every purpose." Thus, following this logic, Sinhala can retain its privileged position: but such privilege, Bandaranaike assures his listeners, meanslittle, and in its noblesse can even allow for some lesser brother to enter the fold:
What does this Bill itself do? Every one of its clauses is subject to the proviso that it does not conflict with the position of the Sinhalese Language as the Official Language of the country...
No one should be threatened, says Bandaranaike. Sinhalese remains the Official Language; a clubhouse set of ethics will prevai in language policy in which new conventions will only arise from extant courtesy. As Bandaranaike explains:
Any Tamil gentleman must have the right to correspond in the Tamil Language but the position of Sinhalese as the Official Language must be preserved. He the Tamil gentleman) can be sentareply in the Official Language, Sinhalese, but for the convenience of the Tamil gentleman who may not know Sinhalese, acopy of a Tamiltranslation or the substance of the reply will be attached to such letter. In these provinces (Northern and Eastern) we are going to permit certain administrative work to be done as prescribed...
Such "gentlemanly" conduct underwrites Bandaranaike's further assurance to the Speaker and House that though there may be "a large
number of Tamil citizens' in the Northern and Eastern Provinces:
43

Page 27
...anybody who wants to transact any business in Sinhalese has the fullest power to do it not only in the Northern and Eastern Provinces but also in any part of the country. That concession is there and it can be made use of.
Section 4 and 5 of the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act No.28 of 1958 provide for use of Tamil in the Northern and Eastern Provinces in both governmental correspondence with the public and within prescribed administrative work. However, Section 6(1) of the said Act proved to be a decisively limiting factor, stating that the Minister "may make regulations to give effect to the principles and provisions of this Act." Until the regulations would be framed under this Act, because of what amounted to a loophole, the Act could-and-did-remain ineffective in practice. In spite of the gentlemanly directives which Bandaranaike voiced, for eight years the Government managed to procrastinate formation of the Act's attendant regulations, rendering the Act's impact nil during a critical period in the nation's process of self-definition.
In 1965, after the General Elections, in the name of stability, a national government was established by the United National Party. As demonstration of its inclusive intention, this government invited Mr. M. Tiruchelvam Q.C., a Federal Party representative who had been a Senator rather than an elected Member of Parliament, to become a Cabinet Member.
Because of this manner of alliance, on the eighth of January, 1966, regulations under the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act No.28 of 1958 were finally introduced in Parliament. Those who had been content to let the ineffective 1958 Billsit on the books now bleated their protest at these all-too-belated implementation measures which would render Tamil an official language. Among those who protested most vociferously were members of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, as well as amid those of the SLFP's leftist allies and trade unions under their control.9
Speaking in support of the tardy regulations, Mr. J.R. Jayewarne explained the rationale behind their compulsory nature:
It was not possible in the Act to say regulations shall be made, therefore they said "may make regulations." And when you make regulations you cannot say, "you may write" but "you must write," so we are making it law that an official must reply in Tamil. You cannot leave it to his whims and fancies. He
44

must write. It is imperative. If he does not, he can be dismissed. If the word "shall' is not there, he need not write in Tamil. The regulation must be imperative. It is a rajye neyogaya.
Perhaps we can say that all compulsions carry on their flipside attendant freedoms. Jayawardene continues:
...no Tamil man should in any way be harassed or harmed by not being able to transact his business with the Government in Tamil. We say, therefore, for the transaction of all Government and Public business, the Tamil Language shall also be used. ... All Government and Public business in the Northern and Eastern Provinces is to be transacted in Sinhala and Tamil also.... If you have public business with a Government Department, or any other institution in Sinhala and Tamil, the records also must be in those languages.
One of the freedoms most frequently warranted within the worldwide history of multilingual policies has been that of fair access to information. Jayawardene illustrates one such scenario:
...if the Education Department holds an inquiry in which there are Tamil witnesses and a Tamil accused, evidence is taken in Tamil. There must be a Sinhalese translation also. Thc record is kept in both. The minutes come to Colombo Head Office of the Education Department. The officers there know only Sinhala; they have the record in Sinhala. The record in Tamil is there for the use of the Tamil-speaking people.
The access provided the population's two sectors will be legislated by a region's majority's requirements, but will show itself responsive to minority requests:
...the maintenance of public records in the Northern and Eastern Provinces will be in Tamil, and in other provinces Sinhala only... if a person writes to the Colombo Kachcheri in Tamil he gets a reply in Tamil. Even if he writes in Tamil to the Matara Kachcheri, he gets a reply in Tamil . . . If you write in Tamil, you get a reply in Tamil throughout the Island. That is what your law says . . .
45

Page 28
Further, though this freedom is restricted to the Northern and Eastern Provinccs, any local authority, such as Batticaloa's Urban Council, "which wants to conduct its business in Tamil...can do so'.
If this Urban Council writes to the G.A. Colombo in Tamil it must get a reply in Tamil. Of course, you can send a reply in Sinhalese and keep a copy in Sinhalcse for purpose of record. ... I think not one person will oppose these regulations we have proposcd except the Members who say, 'Sinhala and Sinhala only Push it down the throats of the non-Sinhalese!" 10
In supporting thcse regulations, thcn-Prime Minister Mr. Dudley Senanayake confirmed that the Northern and Eastern Provinces would possess two languages of administration.
in support for the regulations, Mr. S.J.V. Chelvanayakam denotcd thc absolute necessity
...for a free people that they should be governcod in their own language. If the people are not governed in thcir own language but in some other language, then those pcoplc are not a frec people. In Ceylon, Tamil should be to the Tamil-speaking people what Sinhalese is to the Sinhalese-speaking people.
Chelvanayakam continued by relating pre- and post-Independence history. The 1944 State Council resolution had accepted the principle of equality of status for Sinhala and Tamil; on this basis Independence had becn granted to the country; all political parties, until 1956, had agreed to "this fundamental principle of parity of status for Sinhala and Tamil":
This right of thc Tamil-speaking people to transact their business with thc government in their own language is the most elementary right. 12
Chelvanayakam's primary regret was that, within adjustments rerrhed under existing laws, such an elementary right could not be extended to areas outside the North-East.
Parliament subsequently passed these regulations as documented in Government Gazette No. 14,653 of February 3, 1966. The Secretary to the Treasury conveyed the message to all public servants via Circular No.686 of March 26, 1966.
46

Three years after the passage of the rcgulations under the Act, thc Treasury issucci Circular No.760 of Fcbruary 28, 1969, clarifying "The Policy of the Government with regard to the Official Language, Sinhala and the reasonable use cf Tamil". As reason is a floating, unfixable quantity, we can note from the title alone how once again Tamil has been relegated to the position of a slip-hitch knot, one holding firm under the pressure of public opinion, but ahlc to be released should other "reasonable' circumstances Watant.
Section 9,01 of this same circular categorically cautioned that “in deploying staff in Government offices, adequate consideration should be given to an officer's proficiency in Sinhala, yet care should be taken to ensure that transfers do not adversely affect the smooth working of Departments in the Official Language". In other words, the policing of the Official Language policy should not interfere with business as usual. The discriminatory feature of this circular is the dumb silence on the staff competent to work in Tamil, and the attendant need for Tamil typewriters. Unfortunately, such omission only presaged the further regression of future
policy.
In May of 1970 the United Front was elected to power. Section 29 of the 1948 Constitution, popularly known as the Soulbury Constitution, had to a limited degree safeguarded minority rights and interests. It had also prevented Parliament from enacting laws detrimental to peace and good government.
The United Front dispensed with the admittedly ambiguous legacy of this entire Constitution. On May 22, 1972, Ceylon was re-named Sri Lanka and declared a Republic, with a new Republican Constitution which came into force. Article 12 of the new Constitution provided that "all laws written and unwritten, in force immediately before the commencement of the Constitution...except as otherwise expressly provided in the Constitution, continue in force."
Under these conditions, the Republican Constitution's Article 8(1) and - (2) said that the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act No.28 of 1958
and the regulations passed under this Act remained effective:
...they) shall not in any manner be interpreted as being a provision of the Constitution but shall be deemed to be subordinate legislation continuing inforce as existing written law under the provisions of Section 13.
47

Page 29
Additionally, Article f 1(3),(4),(5) and (6) of the new Constitution provided for the use of Tamil in the courts for pleadings and applications. The National State Assembly of the Republic of Sri Lanka passed the Language of the Courts (Special Provisions) Law, No. 14 of 1973, whereby the use of Tamil in the Courts was defined. Regulations under this Law No. 14 of 1973 were passed by the National State Assembly and gazetted in Government Gazette Extra-Ordinary making further clarifications on the use of Tamil in Courts in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.
The significant feature of this Constitution is the absence of a clause like the Soulbury Constitution's Article 29 which had guaranteed some protection of minority rights. Further, the provisions on the use of the Tamil language generally are treated as subordinate legislation and not as Constitutiv." provisions. One stark fact so far ignored by students of this subject is that three pieces of legislation- the Official Language Act No.33 af 1956, the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act No.28 of 1958 a the Lang age of Courts (Special Provisions) Law No. 14 of 1973-areas independent of one another as though they had occurred in a vacuum of legislative discourse.
Why? In yet another ironic scrambling of the need for clear communication when passing language laws, the 1958 and 1973 laws are no amendments to the Original Law No. 33 of 1956. Further, the preamble to these later two Laws say that they will be implemented "without conflicting with the provisions of the Act No.33 of 1956: the second and third laws reiterate the position that the original Act shall not be infringed.
This plurality of directives within the law offers a variety of shelters for those resistant to the official use of Tamil. Under this equivocation, even an officer who willfully discards the laws' requirements regarding the use of Tamil cannot be dealt with, for he could always take cover under the stand that he merely continued to implement 1956's Sinhala-Only provisions. Legally irreproachable and original, the Sinhala-Only Law then continued to occupy a supreme position. Subsequent legal provisions lacking the usual clause "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other Law" could only be interpreted as being superseded by the single Official Language Law - i.e. Act No.33 of 1956, warranting a Sinhala-Only policy, a founding policy.
As circular instructions' provisions prove of no legal avail, they become, with continued irony, mere language games. Until Act No.28 of 1958 and the regulations made thereunder, in addition to Law No. 14 of 1973, took the
48

form of an actual amendment to Act No.33 of 1956, nothing tangible could be realized.
In the interests of implementation, during the period between 1970 and 1976, Mr. K.P. Ratnam several times surveyed various Ministers to research whether there were Tamil stenographers, typists and translators in the respective Ministries and Departments, Corporations or Statutory Boards that came under the Ministers’ purview.
Barring a few exceptions, the reply always boomeranged back in the negative. Ministers of Information and Broadcasting 3 Fisheries, Posts and Telecommunications, 5 and Labour replied that there were no qualified Tamil speakers or writers. However, the Minister of Finance 17 gave the following information:
Treasury: 1 Tamil translator; 1 Tamil typist
Department of Inland Revenue: 3 Tamil typists
Department of Valuation: 1 Tamil typist
Central Bank: 3 Tamil typists
People's Bank: l Tamil translator; 3 Tamil stenographers
State Mortgage Bank: l Tamil typist
During the period of Ratnam's research, from 1970 to 1976, the grievances of the Tamil-speaking people had been accumulating. Exacerbating the collective and deep frustration was the refusal by Sirimavo Bandaranaike of an interview with Chelvanayakam, in which he would have discussed a six-point programme he had submitted to her. This growing sense of disenfranchisement on the part of Tamil speakers would surface within the 1977 election campaign as a series of promises made within the United National Party's manifesto.
49

Page 30
NOTES
11
2
13
i4
15
7
Natesan, S., Hansard, Parliament of Ceylon, Vol.23, Columns - 1862, 1863, 1864, 1865, 20th January 1956.
Hansard, Parliament of Ceylon, Vol.24, Column 735,5th June 1956.
Ibid, Column 1917, 14th June, 1956.
Ibid, Column 1939, 14th June, 1956.
Ludowyke, E.F.C. Modern History of Ceylon, pp.246/247
Hansard, Parliament of Ceylon, Vol.31, Col. 11245, 17th July iyip.
Ibid, Column 1938, 5th August 1958.
Ibid, Columns 1967-68, 1971-72.
Hansard, Parliamentary Debates - Vol.64 Book I, Jan.08, 1966 - Cols. 39-44.
Ibid., Cols. 106, 108, 1 10, l 12 to 114.
Ibid. Vol.64 - Bk. iv - Jan. 1 l, 1966. Cols, 737.
Ibid. Column 130, Jan.08, 1966.
Perera, R.S., Minister of Information and Broadcasting, Hansard, NSA, Vol.4(ii) pt. 14 Jan. 19, 1973, Col.2936-37.
Ibid, Col.2937.
Jayaratne, S.D.R., Ministry of Fisheries.
Karunaratne, V.T.G., Dy. Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, Hansard, NSA, Vol.5 pt. 5, Feb.22, 1973, Col.549.
Ratnayake, K.B. Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Sports, on behalf of Minister of Labour, Hansard, NSA Vol.5 pt?, March 03, 1973, Col.932-933.
Perera, N.M., Minister of Finance, Hansard, N.S.A., Vol.4 (ii) pt. 12. Jan.04, 1973, V
50

Table 1
APPOINTMENT OFSTENOGRAPHERS, TYPISTS AND TRANSLATORS BETWEEN 22ND JULY 1977 AND MARCH 31, 1980
Posts Total Sinhalese % Tamils % Muslims %
Stenographer 198 35 68.2 45 22.7 18 9.1
Typist 44 376 90.8 3 7.5 07 17
Translators 05 OS 1000 -
Source: Parliament Hensard. DSR, SL - Vol. 10 Pt, 17
June 04, 1980 - 1480, 1504, 1496
51

Page 31
CHAPTER V
FRESH HOPES UNDER NEW CONSTITUTION
In 1977, on the eve of the General Election, the United National Party issued its Party manifesto wherein it categorically stated:
... that the United National Party accepts the position that there are numerous problems confronting the Tamil-speaking people. The lack of a solution to their problems had made the Tamil-speaking people support even a movement for the creation of a separate state. In the interest of national integration and unity so necessary for the economic development of the whole country, the Party feels such problems should be solved without loss of time. Thc Party, when it comes to power, will take ail possible steps to remedy their grievances in such fields as - (i) Education; (2) Colonization; (3) Use of the Tamil Language; (4) Employment in the Public and SemiPublic Corporations.
Simultaneously attracted by the UNP's promise and frustrated by the United Front government headed by Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike, minorities outside the North and East supported the UNP. In the North and East the Tamil United Liberation Front received a mandate for the Vaddukkoddai resolution which called for, as last resort, the cstablishment of a separate state. Yet even in the North-East the UNP managed to receive a substantial share of support, and in July of 1977, was voted to power.
The young government announced that it would usher in a new constitution. On September 7, 1978, this new Constitution, in which the Republic of Sri Lanka was renamed the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, provided for an Executive Presidency. Though this Constitution made certain provisions for the use of the Tamil Language, and the resonant Article 9 did recognise Tamil as a national language, Article 18, all-tooaware of the potency of terminology, re-affirmed Sinhala as the official language.
52

Nonetheless, earlier and less powerful provisions supporting the use of Tamil as an official language were here finally assimilated into a stronger vehicle. For example, the new Constitution's Article 21 incorporates the provisions of Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act No.28 of 1958.
Article 22, dealing with the language of administration, includes those regulations effective from February 3, 1966, which had been made under Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act No. 28 of 1958. Section 24 incorporates the provisions of the earlier Language of Courts (Special Provisions) Law, No. 14 of 1973.
Yet the genuine implementation of these provisions in the true spirit of the Constitution required concrete change in state infrastructure. Tamil stenographers, typists and translators would need to be trained and present throughout all areas of government. To effect such change, governmental will and determination to implement Constitutional provisions proved critical.
Answering aquestion in Parliament, the Minister of Public Administration gave detailsof the appointment of Tamilstenographers, typists and translators between July 22, 1977 and March 31, 1980 (See Table I for details.) What remains unknown was, apart from the question of the recent recruits ethnic identification, the number of new employees who showed proficiency in Sinhalese, Tamil, or English media. In the interest of implementing Tamil as a language of administration in the North-East, and in other districts warranted by constitutional provisions, such statistical ignorance proved obstructive.
Justice delayed is justice denied, as the judicial norm understands. After 1977, cases in appeal from largely Tamil-speaking areas were subject to such obstructive delays.
Situations for which recourse was promised abounded. For instance, Mr. K. Thurairatnam, then-Member of Parliament for Point Pedro, related to the Minister of Justice delays indisposal of appeals from Point Pedro's District Court due to the want of Tamil typists and translators in the appellate courts. Confirming the fact, the Deputy Minister of Justice promised to lookinto the matter.
Likewise, Mr. W. Dahanayake, MP for Galle, informed the Minister of Home Affairs that Tamil-speaking residents of Galle suffered due to the
53

Page 32
lack of a Tamil-speaking officer in Galle's Land and District Registry office. In reply, the Ministcrof Home Affairs promised that an officer was being posted to the office.2
Yet across the country the lack of implementation continued. Then-MP for Kayts, Mr. K.P. Ratnam, complained in Parliament that despite the President's directive the Ministry of Fisheries continued to send him letters in Sinhala, obviously because the Ministry did not have officers competent to handle Tamil correspondence.3
Because of the inadequacy of state officers to transact business in Tamil, great inconvenience continued to oppress the Tamil-speaking population. For example, the press generously reported the problems of the Punduloy. Post Office.4 At 1984's Annual General Meeting of the Sub-Postmasters Union, Tamil-speaking Sub-Postmasters spoke of hardships experienced by them due to the lack of a Tamil-speaking officer at the provincecontrolling Divisional Superintendent of Post Office in Amparai.5 Such problems, related to as important an infrastructural elcment as a country's communication system, were hardly isolated.
Year after year in Parliament, when occasions arose, Tamil-speaking Members of Parliament complained of hardships undergone by the Tamilspeaking public due to the inadequacy of Tamil-speaking state officers. Mr. R. Sambandan, then-MP for Trincomalee, complained that the following officers in his district were all solely Sinhalese speakers: the Government Agent himself; Assistant Government Agent (Head-Quarters); Assistant Government Agent (Lands); District Land Officers; Acting Assistant Director of Social Services; Acting Assistant Director of Small Industries; Planning Officer; Assistant Commissioner of Agrarian Services; District Manager; Housing Department; District Forest Officer, Divisional Director of Irrigation; Director of Education; and the Assistant Commissioner of Local Government.
Further, Sambandanmentioned that not enough Tamil-speaking officers, stenographers, typists and clerks were recruited. He observed:
When a Tamil-speaking Member of the public goes to the Trincomalee Kachcheri, he cannot converse in his own language with any senior public official of any consequence.
54

Though the new Constitution had requircdnublic records to be maintained in Tamil in the North and East, the evidence, according to Sambandan, was sorely lacking. He asked the House: “How can Tamil be the Language of Administration also is this is the position in the North and East?"6
The MP for Pottuvil, Mr. M.A.M. Jalaldeen, also made complaints which revealed not only a lack of governmental good faith but also an inefficiency consequent upon the lack of Tamil speakers. Though the Amparai Kachcheri was the major government office in Jalaldeen's district, serving a largely Tamil-speaking population, most of its staff was constituted of non-Tamil-speaking Sinhalese. Unable to communicate with the bureaucratic level meant to serve it, the district's people tended to circumlocate the Kachcheri and speak directly to the top: in this case, the three Members of Parliament for Sammanturai, Pottuvil, and Kalmunai. In addition to requesting the appointment of more Tamil-speaking officers, Jalaldeen also requested the transference of all non-Tamil-speaking Assistant Government Agents out of his electorate.7
Replying to these criticisms, Mr. K.W. Devanayagam, Minister of Home Affairs, agreed that though there was a shortage of Tamil-speaking staff, he was helpless:
I would very much like to recruit Tamil-speaking officers. Although thc Leader of the Opposition often says that we are not implementing the language provisions of the Constitution, we have no way of implementing the provisions in question because of the shortage of Tamil-speaking officers in every Kachcheri for the purpose of facilitating business not only in the Northern and Eastern Provinces but also in otherSinhalese arcas. Even the Minister of Rural Industrial Development has been clamouring for Tamil-speaking officers in the Kachcheries in Midland areas. Even in my electorate there is a Sinhala-speaking officer because I cannot find a Tamilspeaking officer to be posted there.8
One can conjecture that such a lack of resources came from the unevenness of educational policy preceding the new Constitution. After Devanayagam's statement, there ensued a Parliamentary discussion in which figured Dr.Ranjith Attapattu, Minister of ColomboGroup of Hospitals, and Major Montague Jayawickrema, Minister of Public Administration. The mentality underwriting this period's debate becomes clear if we eavesdrop upon a sample of this discussion:
55

Page 33
Dr.Ranjith Attapattu: I do not deny his right to request that more Tamilspeaking people be employed in Government service and that his area be serviced adequately. Not very long ago there was a disproportionate number of Tamil-speaking Public Servants, which was of course due to various historical factors, mainly . . .
Mr.A.Amirthalingam: That was before 1956.
Dr.Ranjith Attapattu : I am not contesting your present position.
Mr.Montague Jayawickrema: Then Sir, their only grouse is with regard to the recruitment of people from the Tamil community. The Minister for Colombo Group of Hospitals and I totally agree with them and I want them to completely dispel any impression they may have that wearediscriminating. We will look into this very carefully and every sentence of their speech would be analysed by the Ministry.9
Aside from the testiness apparent among the Ministers, it is evident that among the Ministers a consensual reality existed regarding the serious shortage of Tamil-speaking staff in the State Services. Additionally, nonimplementation of the Constitutional provisions not only rendered the provision empty words, but also severely limited the employment horizon for Tamil speakers.
Undeterred by setbacks, and frequently spearheaded by Mr. K.P. Ratnam, Tamil Members of Parliament consistently questioned the government's delay in implementation of the Tamil language Constitutional provisions. In response, by 1978 the Government had appointed Mr. C. Rajadurai as Minister of Regional Development and Implementation of Tamil Language and Hindu Affairs.
Still, this appointment may have proved to be more of a pro forma response, one unwittingly designed to produce rather than lessen the intricacy of bureaucratic catacombs. On November 20, 1979. Pr2m complained that when both the President and the Minister-in-Charge were addressed on the question of implementing the Tamil language provisions, they replied that the Attorney General was being consulted with regard to legal implications. Later both replied by stating the obvious: a Tamil Minister, Rajadurai, had been appointed to give effect to the Constitutional provisions.10
56

On August 6, 1980, Ratnam again askcd regarding thc action taken to implement Constitutional provisions. As Ministcr Rajadurai was absent, two Deputy Ministers later undertook to bring it to his attention.
On September 5, 1980, Ratnam repeated this question:
My first question is addressed to the Minister of Regional Development. I should like to know when the guidelines sanctioned by the Cabinet for the implementation of the Tamil language rights guaranteed by the Constitution will be issued. Last time, I was told that the guidclines would be issued. That assurance was given more than a month ago. I want to know when these guidelines will be issued. My second question is connected to the above. I wish to know what action has been taken so far to start training classes for the training of Tamil typists and stenographers. Whenever we inquire about the position of the implementation of the Tamil language rights, all Departments say that there is a shortage of Tamil typists and stenographers. The last time I raised this question in the House I was told that classes would be started as early as possible. I understand that so far, nothing has been done. I request the Minister to tell me when the classes will be started. 12
Ratnam's question went unanswered. When this question was further pressed on November 6, 1981, Minister Rajadurai replied that the circular containing the instructions on the implementation of the Tamil language provisions of the Constitution would be issued in a week or two with Cabinet sanction.3
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the circular was never issued. Again, on February 26, 1982, Ratnam had to raise this issue in Parliament:
As the circular for the implementation of the Tamil Language Rights has not yet been issued, in spite of the Honorable Minister's assurance in this House on 6th November, 1981, that he would get the Cabinet sanction within one or two weeks to implement it, I am asking again, for the sixth time, when this circular will be issued.
Neither Minister Rajadurai nor any other voice of the government replied.
57

Page 34
Ratnam was not the only MP pursuing this elusive idcal of adequatic linguistic representation. Mr. M. Alalasundaram, then-MP for Kopay, said that although some officers had tried to effect the provisions to transact business in Tamil, they had found the unavailability of Tamil typewriters and typists a great hindrance. In Tamil-spcaking areas, continued Alalasundaran, many government offices in the Tamil areas have no typewriters. He urged the Minister to take action to supply Tamil typewriters and appoint Tamil typists.5
The indefatigable Ratnam complained again in Parliament that the previous appointment of a Tamil minister prove an insufficient reply to the issue of implementing Constitutional Tamil language provisions. The appointed Minister seemed incapable of implementation, Ratnam argucd. as on the fifth occasion the topic was discussed in the House Rajadurai had given a final assurance that he would issue the circular in two weeks. Two months having passed from such assurance, a disillusioned Ratnam felt that there was little point bringing the girevances ofteh people to the notice of the Government. 16
On August 19, 1982, when Supplementary Estimates for the Regional Development Ministry were being discussed in Parliament, Mr. V. Yogeswaran continued to express this disillusionment:
... that the implementation of the Tamil Language Act is a dead letter. It is a fraud. There is no question about that. The Tamil people have been taken for a big ride...The Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act is a dead letter. It is like the famous emperor's robe. Everybody is saying that the man is coming down in golden robes, but I see him stark naked. 17
Answering these colorful criticisms, Minister Rajadurai said that the circular on the subject drafted by his Ministry had been studied several times and, though still only a draft, had been amended by the Ministry of Public Administration and the Attorney-General's Department. He also said that his Ministry and the Ministry of Public Administration were ful. sudying the possibilities of adding any other clauses that would dispel the misgivings of the Tamil-speaking population. Continuing further, the Minister said that the District Councils that had been established had created the opportunity, in the North and East, of transacting all business in Tamil. He mentioned that schemes had begun to address the need to train officers in Tamilstenography and typewriting and to supply Tamil typewriters to governmental
58

departments. When this scheme had been completed, promised Rajadurai, even Tamils outside the North and East would be able to transact their business with the government in Tamil. 18
On September 9, 1982, Ratnam again raised the issue. He asked Minister Rajadurai whether the Cabinet had approved the draft circular. The Minister said that he wanted an additional two months in order to answer the question. 19
One month later, on November 3, 1982, Rajadurai's Ministry of Regional Development and Implementation of Tamil and Hindu Religious Affairs again underwent criticism. A supplementary vote for the Ministry regarding cover-upexpenses incurred in conducting the World Hindu Conference was being discussed.
Herc again the tantalising circular figured. Mr. T. Sivasithamparam, then-MP for Vavuniya, protested that the circular had not been issued.20 Mr. A. Amirthalingam, then-Leader of the Opposition, observed the shifting of responsibility that had occurred:
... it is now more than four years since this constitution was enacted containing certain provisions with regard to the use of the Tamil Language. If we ask His Excellency the President why are these provisions not implemented? the answer we get is: "Why? I have appointed your man to look after these matters: askhim.' That is all that His Excellency says, and that is what the Honorable Ministers of the Government say. But when we ask this Honorable Minister, he says: "Oh, the circular is coming next month, the month after or the month after.' And it goes on like that.
Amirthalingam went on to ask whether another four years would be required in which another circular on implementation would be prepared. Or, he hazarded, "is it that they do not want to implement those provisions and that those are there only as an eye-wash?" He continued by describing an abuse which might not have occurred had the circular been issued: "would the Honorable Minister of Regional Development (Rajadurai) have sent a letter in Sinhala only to the Honorable Member for Vavuniya?"
Amirthalingam continues by reminding the assemble of the Constitutional right to correspond in one's own language, whether Sinhala or Tamil.
59

Page 35
Because of Rajadurai's failure to prepare and issue the circular, says Sivasithamparam, "everybody is treating the provisions in the Constitution regarding the use of the Tamil language as a dead letter."
Moreover, with no mean dose of sarcasm, Amirthalingam emphasizes that Tamil typewriters must be obtaincd before "the Honorable Minister thinks of appointing female typists." The circular must be issued before Rajadurai resigns and before Rajadurai must "take the blame of having thwarted the Tamil Language provision of the Constitution by his inaction".2
Rajadurai having made no reply, a few weeks later, on November 25, 1982, Mr. K.P. Ratnam asked him:
(1) Whether the Cabinet has approved the draft circular containing
the guidelines to implement the Tamil Language Rights?
(2) When this draft circular was submitted to the Cabinet? and
(3) When will this circular be issued?
Minister Rajadurai now replied, saying that the Cabinet to which the circular was submitted on December 27, 1980, had not yet approved the draft circular. Without such approval, the circular could not be issued.22
Here we might pause to set out the chronology of the delay's and its consequences:
(i) The draft circular on the implementation of Tamil language provisions in the Constitution promulgated in September, 1978, was submitted to the Cabinet after two years on December 27, 1980.
(ii) . In 1982, the Cabinet had yet to confirm implementation.
(iii) Consequently, recruitment of Tamil-speaking staff to man the administration had been gravely handicapped.
Mr. K.W. Dewanayagam, Minister of Home Affairs, directly in charge of Internal Administration at the district level, repeatedly admitted the problematic situation. On December 11, 1981, referring to the Language Department, he lamented the insufficiency of Tamil officers to "translate
60

this provision." Dewanayagam had found it difficult to recruit even for his own offices qualified Tamil speakers and writers. Without such resources, Dewanayagam foresaw, implementation would prove wcll-nighimpossible.
Regarding the drafting of the circular he added:
... that having considered all these difficulties, the Cabinet has appointed a committee consisting of the Honorable Minister of Regional Development, Rural Industries, Transport and Foreign Affairs, and the Honorable Deputy Minister of Finance to go into this problem and draw up ways and means and to find out how it can be implemented. . . In the final implementation, the authority is probably the Honorable Minister of Public Administration. The last time we met, we framed these circulars which are still in the process of being evaluated by the Attorney-General because we find that there is some differences with regard to the official capacity in which it can be done.2
Complaints of non-implementation of the Constitutional provisions for the Tamil language figured again in 1983 during a discussion on budget proposals. Mr. A. Amirthalingam, then Leader of the Opposition, referred to his own experience: even as a Member of Parliament, he said, he continued to receive letters in Sinhala. He also complained that as Sinhalese judicial officers manned the Vavuniya courts, contrary to Constitutional provisions court records were maintained in Sinhala.
Employment promises had fallen into the same quagmire. Though the President had written to Amirthalingam "as early as 1979" that the Tamilspeaking population had justifiable"grievance in the matterofemployment," nothing had been done. If, as Amirthalingam continued, recruitment in both public and ... mi-public sectors were to follow a population ratio, for six years nothi... had ameliorated discriminatory hiring practices. What such inaction let to was a resistance which Amirthalingam framed as the following question: "How can we co-operate when notone of the grievances that the Tamil people have put forward has been remedied?":
Though many of the honorable back-benchers of the government seem to think that everything has been done, that they have done a lot for us, I ask any Honorable Minister. to get up and say . . . one substantial matter that they have done
61

Page 36
to remove the grievances of the Tamil people after they came into power in 1977.
Referring to the oft-flaunted District Development Councils established two years earlicr Amirthalingam described how, due to the lack of funds allocated them, they had been crippled in their provision of services. Further:
On matters where the remedying of grievances of the Tamil people are concerned, the Government moves at a snailspace, but on matters where the Tamil people had to be put down, they move at jet speed.
He anticipated retorts by saying that a few exceptions stood out solely because they were exceptions: that there were, for instance, a few Tamils in the diplomatic corps, but that these exceptions were carry-overs from a quickly receding past. Instead, Amirthalingam urged, one should examine the composition of the lower ranks of public service. Not even the Public Administration Ministry employed enough Administrative Service Tamils to serve as Assistant Government Agents in Tamil areas. Amirthalingam concluded by noting that the Home Affairs Minister had both on the House's floor and in discussions with the President admitted the disproportion in hiring practices. 24
Responding to the complaints of Mr. A. Amirthalingam, Prime Minister R. Premadasa said:
In order to do justice to the Tamil-speaking people, we have included certain provisions in the Constitution. The Leader of the Opposition said that certain circulars have not been issued. I wish to state here: as a government, we have decided to implementall the provisions, and that all those responsible must take action. I wish to state on behalf of the Government that we shall take suitable action where such action has not been taken.25
To make good such Parliamentary assurance, Premadasa appointed a high-powered Committee comprised of senior Secretaries of Ministries headed by Mr. Bradman Weerakoon, Secretary to the Prime Minister. Having delved into the question of implementing the Constitution's Tamil language provisions, the Committee was to devise means and advise the
62

Government on implementation. Other Members included: D.B.I.P.S.Siriwardhana, R. Paskaralingam, Cyril Gamage, E.L.Wijemanne, P.Ramalingam and C.Chanmugam.26
Perhaps expectably, nothing came of this drum and timbrel flourish.
On August 4, 1983, Home Affairs Minister K.W. Dewanayagam again decried the delayed implementation of the Tamil language provisions. The Constitution's Sixth Amendment proved relevant
Of course, there is very little left to be fulfilled because of the lack of implementation of the Constitution. I must say that the root cause for the entire dissatisfaction of the minority is the lack of implementation. I remember, when this was taken up in the Cabinet. His Excellency inexasperation said: "How can you expect a Sinhala Minister to administer your Tamil Language?" It is a fact that thereafter a committee was formed and it was entrusted to the Ministerof Regional Development. I think he has not fully done his duty. Otherwise, it will not be in this state. I say it with great distress.27
In 1983, shortcomings in the use of the Tamil language and the lack of Tamil-speaking officers were also pinpointed by Mannar's District Minister Mr.M.E.M. Maharoof28 as well as Pottuvil's MP, Mr.M.I.Uthumalebbe.29 While speaking on the Votes of the Regional Development Ministry in Parliament on December 22, 1983, Mr. Anura Bandaranaike, Leader of the Opposition, gently criticized the Regional Development Ministry for its increasingly unjustifiable delay,30
In reply, Minister Rajadurai explained that implementation of Constitutional Tamil language provisions in could not be done in a hurry. First, a Cabinet Sub-Committee must advise the Ministry; after which decisions could becommunicated to the Public Administration Ministry for further observations; after which, the Attorney-General's comments and advice would be sought. As a result, saida Rajadurai who had been in charge of implementation for five years, a certain amount of delay was inevitable.3
Once again, this oft-mentioned magic circular, bearing instructions for
the implementation of Tamil language rights, remained a distant- if tantalising-mirage.
63

Page 37
Yet finally, in 1984, Rajadurai's Ministry of Regional Development, Implementation of Tamil Language and Hindu Affairs drew tha attention of Government Agents in the Northern and Eastern Provinces to the Tamil language Constitutional provisions regarding administration in the North and East.
Looking more closely however, one finds that this much-anticipated circular letter draws a full circle: it refers to Public Administration Circular No. 242 of March 8, 1984, which in turn only reproduces Constitutional Articles relating to the use of the Tamil language with a request that those provisions must be strictly observed.
The Regional Development Ministry Circular referred to decisions made during the Cabinet meeting of January 25, 1984. Five months later, these decisions are published in Circular No. ADM/TLP184 of June 26, 1984.
Amid this paper mill of circulars from both the Public Administration Ministry and the Regional Development Ministry there remains a profund silence on the need for Tamil typewriters, Tamil typists, Tamilstenographers and Tamil translators. Without these resources, implementation anyway could in no wise be enforced or achieved. Further, the circulars in their currentform specify only that Tamil can be used within the ambit of Sinhala, the official language of Sri Lanka. Such as they are, these documents provide for crumbs from the long-promised feast of the Circular.
Further, as Sinhala still at this juncture remained the singular official language, any reasonable and meaningful position that may have been accorded to Tamil was bound to be interpreted as conflicting legally with the Sinhala- Only Law. If any genuine change were to be implemented, an amendment to the Official Language Act which would have, according to the nation's pre-existing Constitution, made Tamil an equivalent language of administration in the Northern and Eastern Provinces was indispensable.
We might ask ourselves how so many bureaucratic road-blocks appeared always at a fortuitous enough time to block passage of any significant implementation. One example might suffice: on May 7th, 1979, the Justice Ministry had sent a directive to all the island's courts. The Ministry permitted "the use of English Language for all purposes in or in relation to the records and proceedings in all Courts throughout Sri Lanka."
64

However, a proviso to the directive cautioned that English could be used only "provided...that the pleadings, applications and motions in all such cases shall also be in such National language as is used in such court".
Acting under this directive, Colombo's Additional District Judge rejected a pleading filed in Tamil in case No.3007/RE and directed the defendant to file pleadings in Sinhala. Perturbed, the defendant pursued his case to the Court of Appeal. While agreeing that the rejection was invalid, the Court of Appeal referred the matter, under Article 125 of the Constitution, to the Supreme Court for a ruling on the constitutional question involved.
In case Coomaraswamy vs. Shanmugaratna Iyer, No:1/80CA, the court held that the proviso in the Justice Ministry's 1979 directive was ultra vires the Constitution. 32 Though the case successfully resulted in the defendant's Tamil pleadings being accepted, we can see from this expenditure of both time and good will the manner in which even Constitutional provisions regarding the Tamil language were viewed and handled by an administration more than reluctant to change.
NOTES
Thurairatnam. K., Parliament Hansard, DSR, SL, Vol. 10, Pt. 10, June 04, 1980, Col. 1522-1523.
2 Dhahanayake. W., Parliament Hansard, DSR, SL, Vol.2, Pt. 15,
November 05, 1982.
R Ratnam K.P., Parliament Hansard, DSR, SL, Vol.20, Pt.7, June 09,
1982, Col.614.
4 Virakesari, January 03, 1983.
5 Thinakaran, February 22, 1984
6 Sambandan. R., Parliament Hansard, DSR, SL, Vol. 13, Pt.8,
December 04, 1980, Col. 1744-1747
7 Jalaldeen. M.A.M., Parliament Hansard, DSR, SL, Vol. 13, Pt.9,
December 05, 1980.
8 Dewanayagam. K.W., Parliament Hansard, DSR, SL, Vol. 13, Pt.9,
December 05, 1980, Col. 1922-1923.
65

Page 38
O
12
13
14
15
16
8
19
20
21
22
Montague Jayawickrema., Parliament Hansard, DSR, SL, Vol. 13, Ptd.8, December 04, 1980, Col. 1751-1752, 1791.
Ratnam, K.P., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.7, Pt.3, November 20, 1979, Col.679-680.
Ratnam, K.P., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard Vol. 11, Pt.4, August 06, 1980, Col.337.
Ratnam K.P., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol. 11, Pt. 12, SEpt. 05, 1980, Col. 1142.
Rajadurai, C., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard-November 06, 1981 Col.2597
Ratnam. K.P., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol. 19, Pt. 10, February 26, 1982, Col. 168 l.
Alalasundaram. M., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.20, Pt. 1 July 07, 1982, Col.926-927.
Ratnam K. P., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol. 21, Pt. 4, August 19, 1982, Col. 1425
Yogeswaran. V., DSR., SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.2, Pt.4, August 19, 1982, Col.438-439.
Rajadurai. C., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.21, Pt.4, Augus 19, 1982, Col.443-444.
Ratnam, K.P. DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.21, Pt. 9, September 09, 1982.
Sivasithamparam.T., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.21, Ptd. 13, November 03, 1982, Col. 1407.
Amirthalingam. A., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.21, Pt. 13, November 03, 1982, COl. 1419-1420.
Ratnam K.P. DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.21, Pt. 16, November 25, 1982, Col. 1095-1096.

23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3.
32
Dewanayagam. K.W. DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol. 18, Pt.9, December 1, 1981, Col.2454-2455.
Amirthalingam. A., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.22, Pt. 12, March 18, 1983, Col. 1758-1759.
Premadasa. R., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.23, Pt. I, March 21, 1983, Col. 25.
Ceylon Daily News, 06, June 1983.
Dewanayagam. K.W, DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.27, Ptd. 18, August 04, 1983, Col. 1378 W
DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.27, Ptd. 18, December 22, 1983, Col.2237.
Ibid. Col.2249.
Bandaranaike, Anura., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.27, Pt. 18, December 22, 1983, Col.2234-2235.
Rajadurai.C., DSR, SL, Parliament Hansard, Vol.27, Pt. 18, December 22, 1983, Col.2256.
Sriskanthas Law Reports, Coomaraswamy Vs. SHanmugaratna Iyer Vol. 1 Part 12 - pp. 159-163.
67

Page 39
CHAPTER VI
TAMIL PUSHED TO BACK STAGE IN PARLAMENT
Not only had the government failed to resolve policy issues related to the Tamil language, but, as testified by the UNP's 1977 General Election Manifesto of 1977, it had become preoccupied with finding military solutions to the Tamils' legitimate grievances. With the passage in 1983 of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, Tamil members of Parliament who really did matter in finding linguistic and other means of creating a democratic forum were thrown out of Parliament. This proved to be one of the most effective ways in which Tamils were cut off from mainstream political activities and participatory democracy. It is outside the scope of this paper to discuss the Sixth Amendment; suffice it to say that both the Amendment and the circumstances under which it was passed in Parliament are a blot on the history of this country and accepted democratic traditions.
The government continued to signal abandonment of democratic commitment. Commencing on May 26th, 1987, its full-scale military venture, Operation Liberation Vadamaradchy, cost over 750 human lives. Citizens could read the operation's dark message: the government would forcibly suppress Tamils' request for restoraticn of lost rights.
India soon entered this hapless situation. An accord was reached between the governments of Sri Lanka and India and signed on July 29th, 1987. While the Accord provided for Sinhala, Tamil and English languages to be administrative languages, it took one year to amend the Constitution toward this end. From December 17th, 1988, the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution which gave effect to the Accord's provision became operative.
However, the Sixteenth Amendment did not alter Articles 8 and 19 of the Constitution which said (a) The official language of Sri Lanka shall be Sinhala and (b) The national languages of Sri Lanka shall be Sinhala and Tamil. The Sixteenth Amendment repealed only Articles 22 and 23 of the Original Constitution and substituted two new articles: 22 and 23.
68

Examining these additions, we find that Article 22 does not provide for . . Tamil's parity with Sinhalese. Instead, in thc North-Eastern Province, the article provides for the use of Tamil as a language of administration and in other areas only for restricted use. Article 18 should have been amended to say that the national languages- Sinhala, Tamil and English- would be Sri Lanka's official languages. To the new additions' credit, Article 25 A does remove prior ambiguities in legal interpretation as it categorically states that the provisions of this Chapter supersedes all other laws. Still, one is unable to understand the motive for the new articles' equivocation: Tamil remains a less-than-official language.
Expectably, despite ostensible legal changes, still nothing tangible resulted and complaints about non-compliance with Tamil language provisions continued.
As problems within the government continued to fester, Tamil politicians decided to rejoin Parliament, notwithstanding the Sixth Amendment which had forced their exit. After the General Election of 1989, Mr. A. Amirthalingam re-entered Parliament only to find the shocking cxtent to which between 1983 and 1989 the position of the Tamil language had deteriorated even within Parliamentary procedure.
Mr. Amirthalingam observed that from 1960 onward, all Parliamentary documents had been supplied to Members as "an accepted and enforced practice." Now, he said, in 1989, Budget estimates were being supplied only in Sinhalese and English, even to Tamil-speaking Members:
Thinking that Tamil copies would be given to us, l sent a note to the Secretary-General yesterday. I got a reply signed by the Director of Budget. In it, it was stated that due to lack of officers - officers competent in Tamil- since 1983 the Budget Estimates are neither prepared in Tamil nor printed in Tamil. And as result during the past five or six years it has not been issued to Tamil Members of Parliament.
Amirthalingam continued by citing in Tamil the Standing Orders which stated that "every Member of Parliament has the right to participate in the proceedings of this House in the Tamil language." He also cited noncompliance with the Sixteenth Amendment which had declared Tamil as one of the official languages. As very few Parliamentary officers possessed Tamil proficiency, the practical support structure had vanished.
69

Page 40
One quarter- approximately fifty- of thc newly-elccted Housc Members spoke Tamil, and among those some kncw only Tamil. As occasional showpicce translations of documents into Tamil proved to be insignificant showpicces. Amirthalingam attempted to rally his fellow members.
Member K.B. Ratnayake inquired in Tamil whether this deterioration had resulted after the declaration of Tamil as an official language. Amirthalingam drove his point home by mcntioning that even after the government had boasted internationally about the Sixteenth Amendment, it had shown its ineffectiveness by not keeping its own laws within its House.
The Speaker expressed regret at the situation and promised to look into grievances. He also warned all Ministers that in future no document would be distributed unless it is in all three languages.2 Yet despite the Speaker's promise and caution, the situation thereafter did not improve. Mr. D.M. Jayaratne, M.P. for Kandy District, drew the Speaker's attcntion to the fact that due to the insufficient numbers of Tamil translators and interpreters, questions in Parliament lay unanswered. Parliament having proven itself to be ineffective, the power to implement the Sixteenth Amendment would soon devolve to a more specific level of administration.
NOTES
Indo-Lanka Accord of 29th July, 1987- Clause 2:18 2 The Chairman, Ibid. Col. 1575.
3 Virakesari - 24. l. 1990.
70

CHAPTER VII
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT BY PROVINCIAL COUNCILS AND LOCAL BODIES
President Ranasinghe Premadasa mooted the idea of appointing an Official Languages Commission to monitor the implementation of the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution. At its meeting of October 12th, 1989, the Cabinet ratified Premadasa's proposal.
Deterred, the idea of democratic linguisticrepresentation had nevertheless not been lost. Mr. Chandra Bandara, then Minister of Public Administration, at a Conference of Government Agents gave the Agents authority to recruit translators, typists and stenographers to implement the Constitution's Sixteenth Amendment. He advised them to recruit retired teachers, graduates and GCE (AVL) qualified officials who were competent in both Sinhala and Tamil to meet the implementation demands.2
Mr. U.B. Wijekoon, then Minister of Public Administration, reiterated this view. He added that it was the responsibility of governmental departments and corporations to make such Tamil-language appointments. The Official Language Department, he said, would be renamed the Official Languages Department and would have a Tamil Unit. Significantly, Wijekoon added that those who failed to use Tamil whenever necessary would be punished. Further, he promised that an Official Languages Commission would be appointed. Following this general trend, the government also announced that name-boards countrywide would be in all three languages. The government extended its reach into the corporate sphere, adding that all office reception centers should possess facilities for processing both Sinhala and Tamil.
In its report of February 15, 1990, the Presidential Commission on Youth recommended:
(a) the full implementation of the Sixteenth Amendment to the
Constitution;
7

Page 41
(b) investing the Commission of Official Languages with broad powers to inquire into discrimination felt by Tamil and Sinhala-speaking people and intervene decisively so as to prevent these issues from galvanizing intopolitical discontent. It is necessary to deal with these issues at the level of a Commission so that the day-to-day interaction of the State with ethnic minoritiesdoes not serve to alienate them.5
The Official Languages Commission Law became operative from March 27, 1991. The appointment of members to the Commission was made on November 13th, 1991. The Commission became functional only from December 1, 1991. By the time gap between each action we can see the slow pace at which matters relating to Tamil affairs have been managed.
A single example will suffice. Even the long-shelved Act No. 33 of 1956 . which stipulated that new governmental appointees must acquire Sinhala proficiency continued to run, long after the passage of the equitable Sixteenth Amendment, in the Government Gazette. Though the print media focused attention on this irrelevancy, the stipulation was altered only after a year.6
Against this background, let us examine how implementation has taken place in various institutions.
Provincial Councils
The Provincial Councils system was born one year before the Sixteenth Amendment. Three years elapsed before the Councils became functional. As the power required for the Councils' existence has still not been devolved, the system continues to remain a showpiece in which individual Councils blame the governmental center for their crippled abilities.
We can note the low status to which the government relegates the Council system by the following physicalisation: at government functions, the Councils' Chief Minister, who should enjoy the status of a Deputy Prime Minister, is seated behind the Assistant Government Agents. By this token, among many others, the center denigrates the Council system.
No wonder, therefore, that the Provincial Councils are finding existence difficult, unable to effect any meaningful change. That those at the Center should be allergic to sharing power at the grassroots level, while notentirely
72

surprising, shows thc way in which Sri Lanka has at times so half-heartedly cultivated participatory democracy.
A Catch-22 becomes operative. In order to implement the Sixteenth Amendment, the government requires the active involvement of the Provincial Councils. In order to bc actively involved, the Provincial Councils require a proper devolution of power and allocation from the government.
A perusal of Annexure 'A' will convince the reader of the strange inefficacy which attended the Sixteenth Amendment. Mr. A. William, Provincial Council Member of Sabaragamuwa Provincial Council, aptly pointed cut that though the Provincial Councils had been created to resolve the ethnic crisis, they were unable even to resolve the question of Tamil language usage within their own administration.7
On October 31, 1991, Mr. M.S. Mohamed Agram. member of the Southern Province Provincial Council, observed the deep and wide consequences of what earlier could have seemed mere bureaucratic laziness:
We must pause to think what the base of the LTTE problem in the North-East is. The agitation was for recognition of language rights. It has today blown up into a demand for separation by the LTTE. If the language problem had been resolved then, this situation would not have arisen. Although today the Government claims to have accorded due place to Tamil language, it cannot be accepted when the Tamil language is being disfigured; not until Tamil-speaking officers, are appointed to offices under the Provincial Councils and the Government. Only then can we stop disfiguring the Tamil language.8
Ifdeeply-rooted, this disfigurement was also widespread. After Agram's tracing of the lineage of the LTTE unrest, Mr. A.L. Abdul Majeed, Member of the now-dissolved North-Eastern Provincial Council, appealed to the Minister of Public Administration, Provincial Councils and Home Affairs to rectify the situation in the Ampara District's administration where the use of Tamil was not being implemented.9 Majeed added what had become obvious: though the Sri Lankan government may content itself with enacting laws, it does not overly concern itself with such laws' implementation.
73

Page 42
Pradeshiya Sabhas
The Pradeshiya Sabha, or District Council, is a form of local administration which offers no substitute for the larger unit, the Provincial Council. Annexure 'B' shows howeven Pradeshiya Sabhas are notable to implement Tamil as a language of administration.
Municipal and Urban Councils
Even the smallest units of administration, the most local of bodies, were finding it difficult to implement Tamil as a language of administration. Why? The same reason obtained: all too few Tamil-speaking officers were available.
Mr. S. Jeevaratnam, Member of the Colombo Municipal Council, appealed to former President Premadasato direct the Council to send letters to Tamil-speaking Members in Tamil.0If such a request must go out in the heart of the Capital, we can only imagine the scarcity of resources in the suburbs and outstations.
We might look at the relative activity of the Matale Municipal Council which represents a town in which ninety percent of residents speak Tamil. Mr. Jaffer Deen, former UNP Member of the Matale Municipal Council, had vociferously criticized the Council for not having implemented Tamil as a language of administration. All official documents were being supplied only in Sinhala and the Council's signboard was written in broken Tamil.12 These elisions occurred not only within a town possessing a Tamilspeaking majority, but also within one where residents' agitation against Sinhala-only signboards had not prevented new ones from going up. 3, 4
Because of the people's organised response, then- Mayor Ranjith Aluvihare acceded and not only had signboards rewritten in Sinhala and Tamil, but attempted to redress other issues: for instance, the lack of Tamil periodicals in the Municipal Council-run Public Library. For all of these improvements by their mayor, Matale's people voiced gratitude regarding the restoration of their rights. 15, 16, 7 Despite this seemingly optimum situation, later reports claimed that the linguistic situation in Matale continued to prove not entirely encouraging or satisfactory.
Having viewed the roadblocks encountered by a town led by a responsive mayor, one might return to the question: what function and purpose is served by deeming a language official?
74

NOTES
15.
16
17
Virakesari, 13. 10. 1989
Ibid, 11.0.1989
Ibid, 14.10.1989
Ibid, 17.10.1989
Sessional Paper No. 1 of 1990
Manoharan, T., Virakesari, 18.3.1989, 2.2.1990
Gunam, Virakesari - 23. 10,89
Thickavayal - Virakesari - 18. 1.89
Demand of Community Centres' Federation, Jaffna, 7.11.89
William, A, Virakesari, 26.1. 1991
Agram, Mohamed, M.S., Virakesari, 5.1 1.91
Majeed Abdul, A.L., Virakesari 8.5.1990
Jeevaratnam, S., Virakesari 8.7.91
Deen, Jaffer, Virakesari, 23.1 1.89
Virakesari, 26.5.90
Virakesari, 31. 10.90
Virakesari, 22. 12.90
Virakesari, 28.1 1.91
Virakesari, 7.8.91
Virakesari, 28.1 1.91
75

Page 43
Jɔyɔɔdɔius ou sį ɔjɔŋ se siue] u, yɛɔds 10.uucp - siue lui sɔuļsną 1ɔesuell 01 sɔŋŋɔɛj oN
'uomeniss 2ų. Ájubɔu o pɔsiulojd - 1ɔıàɔu possəıdxə wɔwɔd zuɔŋɔŋmɛÁzs (JW wɔısłuisw jɔŋɔ ’sayısjo uį suɔɔŋJĵo ŝuļņeads-Ilue L oN ‘seqes eksųsəpela ‘sopoq lexos us osse inq sipunoɔ ɔų. u! Ásuo sou uouensiuļupe uį 202|d ou seų siue 1
:S ’S ‘o suņwods sur 1 QN w sequis uỊ sıyız!
·lesnois) IIe - Ispumoɔ uț [lue L 10, 23rd ON
'siqi dois 01 131stuiw jɔŋɔ pɔlue M 'Isule 1 ŝuụouổi sɔŋpoq 12301 - \sule 1 us 10u spie08 3ur N osuu02 'uomensỊuļupe jo 23emẫues e se pɔsuɔuloīdus ŝuloq sou sį siulo I ieņ pəJosdaq
ÁĮUO ĐỊequis uį suositiqɔsɔɔ kwɑ ɔwɔ ɑ wɔN əı sırįmoup II, suįvyjy seinųnɔ puɛ u0ņepmp3 Jo Kwissusw. pɔuuɔpu0ɔ
suɔumɔ0p jo Isuel us uolue|sueil on
INIWT IW00 30 os\lVN
3)WTSSeáIII "W 'I ‘JCI DWTSsæÁțIII'W', 'iq ɔWTS ·sæÁųII W 'I (JG
CHONIAOYHAI NORICIJLSCHAA HJL HON
-Op--op-op--Op'0 'MA ’0sɛpɛlilɛY ’N ‘N ‘Iyo! \|38|W}{W
ÄJ (IWðLNWNIWTHWO) JO IWWN
ĉHONIAORMdI NORITMIJLSCHAA STION000 TIVIONIAONICH W CIXI QX6INNV
$ ‘I’W - XA
68°6' 97 • XA
68', los I - XIA
戀 16°01’ LI • XA
68’y’s I - XIA 68'['{Z - XIA
sosiños
‘ON TWIŅAS
76

'popțAoid sou spum; ɔlɛnbɔpɛ puɛ pɔAį0A9p uɔɔq 10u ɔAtų suɔwod 31embɔpɛ sɛų poppe OsỊe 3H (suaunimuɔɔi Joj ppų su0ụruļulexɔ ɔlidsop punoj ɔq 10ú pĮmoɔ suosiad pɔŋŋɛmb əįqzısms se pɔddzɔıpueų sem ɔ, lɛŋ lƏŋɔɔ pɔssəıdxɔ lɔissusw. piųɔ 'uossỊA0id |vuonnıusu0ɔ ɔų jo ɔıldsus uoļensiuļupe jo ɔầemẫuel se pəluəulaţdui žutoq 10u fituel
luxurdimbɔ jo ÁỊddns Jog pølse) suɔpuəl pur pɔlulodde uɔɔq seų 12121d12ļus un pies viumızuzules og og 'Iw upuutɛŋɔ ɔųL 'popļA0Jd Nouļoq 100 suomessuti put suɔmɔıdıɔlus iuspicàɔ, pɔumɛiduI0ɔ
'23emẫues |espijjo se lluit I. (usluotuosduț Iou si ŋɔunoɔ 3ųı ırųı iusses luapısəla ɔŋ “TH 01 iuleţduoɔ
·luaujaïeueW ɔɔuzuļa uleţdxɔ o. 1910H suɔɔnò ɔų ir pļ2ų ɔɔuələju0ɔ e j0 sầulpɔɔɔ01d jo uouebidjanu! Ilule 1 ou sea 312ų, ieqi pɔuosdaq
JeɔÁ uɛ lɔAO JOJ uoueifãe ɔŋdsəp əuop sena šulųnou seų pɔŋɔ,338
ļue 1 jo osm 3ų, 10; ‘sidad pur sɔŋsiulw lle uį popțA0id aq pỊnóųs sɔŋŋɔɛJ lle izqi uolinļosɔu paauw ÁĮuo esequisu, ɔlɔba sulloju0ņwuɔŋɛ puɛŋɛŋ pɔIOĮdəG pɔluț0dde 1212ıdıəlui ue suɔquiou |sule i put uusuw są uoslensão paầu0101d 1ɔŋy
uueųųIW YW ‘I ‘JW
sluopuodsəuoɔ -luopuodsəu0ɔ ŋAmoa
· luopuodsɔŋ0ɔ
· NOLLISOd INVNIWTHWOO HO gwyn
Jens supleads-Isume I, joĀŋIsqeiseae uoN.
·V 3.HNIQXGINNy
68'90's I XA 68'90, 10 XA 68°50'OZ XA
68°50'$I XA 68°9′0|| 68’ș0'O, XA 68'{0' [I XA 68'10'91 XA
30800S
TWIŅĶIS
96

2ầenầues supuso ut osse sỊ Quel qẩmoq|p - pɔɔɔŋɔAu0ɔu! ɔŋųnd suņvads - Ļuel - Ásuo esquis us sousopim0 put surog slųoqımy suɔudopaoq ŝuismoHleuogo N
63')|['g u0 luotuoļļied uļ suņ|duI00 - pɔsm (qısmul Oslo llule 1 · posti župą si tự quis Ásuo suosiniųsus 20ļajos įmoK UI
ɔɔ nɔviduos sousį i, ɔầemẫue||espujoue pɔlɛŋɔps! ļuviųầnoŲIV (63,1'; uolupulziļizdus luselduð0
'pɔŋŋɔɔi u0ņemts sų 123 01 utiliepuolų "Souoh 01 Izadde o sɔŋɔueig put 30 jo pross ir Jwls suņvads-llulel luopųnsul
arī 2ų jo nuoupuɔulo sis333ms · Ľulo I us ųjų v 12ısıàɔı 01:21q2ũng · Napısım0 2002)uzulpī0 quįg jo uoslenstàɔw jo (I), U00238 lopun
OsỊe [suis I uį posejdssp aq prroq-oueu ɔŋ lɛŋ isɔmbɔi sluopisos
'puan ÁųıĮvoqum sų polo|dɔpɔırışjo laistuiw o surseIIPS'S W TW os upas kļuo vjequis us suɔmɔI suos 2A8|| Jm0qoT J0 1auoissiuuoɔ put oqu0|0) w '0 irqi shouẩuționò
10țIISIG elinpeg uį 321Jo isoa ol slopujo suņoods-llut I JO iu:unusoddzəııuotuvųıca usuɔAļš uoņsambļ090||ON
suivi u 10n sosną ALTS U0 spī£08 00ụeusisoq
duizo
(suuįııııııŝu] ɔɔțA13$ qinos)
Įviouɔ9
oquioỊ0ɔ surg său, Aes scuomen
peupuɔɔ
ɔɔŋJO 150ā Áņuex
1ɔŋsip ĐỊImpeg ¡¡nyuwunpew
JJuļA01) unsas solutio QMɔ
1ɔmɔT
2ırış 10 Jassiusw. -uDH
JɔŋɔT
luopuodsɔJJ00
qelinqsıH ‘JW
qeseusų, ruas searW ‘iw
selepuļA09 'S
uqof op 'x'
·10ɔ ɛɲɛsɛpɛsuɔS
seļ101īpg
1ɔMay ‘W ‘H 'W' q'oues uvjerasɔầuỊT “I
68'), ['L', XA
68', ['60 XIA
68') ! '90 XA
68'Zl's O XA
68’01” LI XIA
68'60 ȘI XA
68’80'90 XA
68'80' 10 XA 68'10" IZ XA
o

Page 54
ẩusseads [suw] airšiuopiŝoj £ 8 se purig ollosťAosť 1011ɔɔŋJO Įuje Ilurodde siMue8 S,9|doəa 'Jæðruww stuosos ososodde uruiepuoụI :$‘uoH
ssoldiol, si aq ssos joispunsog jos) povolupaudous osqnd ussns put nulej *Wouko||20ų sɔɔŋ01s0aussiasjöjučios
poɔuoluɔAu0ɔu, orsqnd ẩusseads-ļue] ·oues seins pur queg sosdosa 'u0IÁɔɔ Jo xurg - syurā op ğSJ90||J0 [luIE1 ON
oousA0id eam sɔɔŋJO isoa II, os suɔɔŋjo Issue 1 juinddo aysunsjoniunililii022sai pue $1$0d J0 Joissusw. 'UoH 01 aloiaUeuepuoĻI 'S 'uos!
Siso10.Jd əlidsap spiros! - outu uloŋ pɔsemɔ ŋues'âuluojns bųqnd ẩuŋoods - Ļuit I -$100Ų0 Hulo I ou əlɛ ələŋ ŋɔuş
eəlɛ əų uį sựule 1 Jo Volionuopuoɔ ɲɔɔŋJosypy zicất sửejša iš 1999JO Įulo I e lusodde om sisegyoUJOH JO Joissus W ‘UCH 01 sieodde uopeliųqtįjį lojJols|u||N ɔsɛış
2ềenổues sepigo o suoliuos}}!dus dpl, Ion IIIae q. ,misɔIIqna 01 sluotuiu|0dde øibuojuodoidsipÁIsensuņa služupi
UsonsW spus [suo] | Ásuo so jo ino -$juotiņusodde suɔɔɔ; əjsự0ņeplumululooajal y sisog jo sols|u|W:u0H 0I supeļduoɔ ɲɔazy'W H 'y tuoH
ɔIIɔŋbaŋsɛJ.
eigeW ? 2||29
tỊeầeksuelaq
ɔɔuỊA01ā eam
wieħeksuwuɔɑ
ɔɔŋJO $. WOW BỊtầessupiaq
sejau29
SAɔN
SAɔN
SA3N
$A3N
$A3N
smɔN
SMɔN
luaplındsai100 luopu0dsə1100 vitiew luopuođsə1100 estisessuriaq luopuodsɔŋɔɔ tImpeg
luopuodsɔIJOɔ ŋwãesupiaq
luopuodsɔuɖɔ
[2!!0!!pg
luopuodsɔŋɔɔ
06'10'$ I XIA 06'10'$ I XA 06'50"Is XIA 0690'6|| XA
06'$0'[[ XA
06IỮ91 XA
68'ZI’0$ XA
68'ZI'00 XA
98

ļļuel u! spiroq u0ụeuŋsƏp 2Aeq 10u op sɔsmų pɔsựdood
-op
;||uig|L uỊ spreoquoi.tunsop panų 100 op sɔsmų pɔsųđ02)
pɔddeospueų Áūzais pīļqnd suņvads - Ļur L - slooŋ0 ŝuĻĀŋɔds -ļuvi. Ou inq 23uỊA0id ɔq us sɔɔŋJO ISOd Z$Z
eỊequļS uỊ Á[ŝuojna uamua sɔuzu uqsmw put itue l’œieduly us uouensiuļupy əų uį 23e1d Ou seų sluit. I 1eųı suɔpɔsɔŋ 2ų Ápuɔŋɔɔxq sıH On sereduly jo uoŋesƏpƏJ suɔminɛ, lenszoonseg“Kızı3133S'uļqelqi ujawsog Áqluț¢[duoɔ
Jɔɔŋ0 Isumi e jo suɔunusodde aq, joj seødde suosum april
pandanne sou ɔlɛ ŋue] us sɔɔŋOU Áumųq0 uɔAɔ ɔɔuis įjįųs susuɔAɔ ɔŋ uỊ yı6A 01 SJ231JJO Įule 1 (vuosuppe suļodde 01 səŋŋoqine lens08 01 sieɔdde y H W A Ápuey
sɔɔŋjo 1409 uỊ ssɔuỊsną 1ɔtsuen 01 21qrun ɔŋqnd ŝuiseads-llule 1 nɔŋŋsiq eáIg-ťiesanN uį sɔɔŋJO 2ų) se uį pɔsuļodde øje siɔɔŋJO Įule 1 12ųı 23$ 01 uvurpūOųı 'Ş'u0H 0I sɔŋIM J01ɔɔliq Icuosas OMO
ɔɔɖA0IJ WAfm
ɔɔuļA0ĻI BAQ
(siq teredmy
seumquL inoqeq Ápuey
ɔɔŋJO - Isod spuey
eẤų3-ejesamN
smɔN
SAɔN
smɔN
shɔN
Sm3N
$A3N
luopmodsəuoɔtipatsisav
luopuodsəu0ɔ eálassew
luopuodsouoɔ mmɑrimɑ
luopuvdsəu00
luopmodsæ1100
luopuodsɔŋɔɔ Ápury
luopuodsəuoɔ spɛwy
luopuodsɔuɖɔ
06'00’90 XA [6'80's, XIA
{6°90’s, XIA
[6'90'$I XIA
06°21′LO XIA
06‛!1 ̇ህ0 »Iለ
06'30", XIA
06'10'00 XTA

Page 55
*MET os is sibimbol jo sisod joj suosinɔŋdde röjšujej Įssẽug us poļšisqnd luɔtíssilijapëɔŋ osse suje I. put eloquĮSus ossuɔApr 01 201ismi jɔlųɔ o, üejäɔjɔİ
'pɔŋŋɔɔu u 103 šioje pouus oŲ 'ısır pələłuy Kussus,ssq us !sue 1 01 Joasă sea obrīd oü irų) pódiosqo,|Iepmulque|nųny Joissu!w - op|Aios ollqow Ieņuopisöjä viisipėghŷ luotuostųoape us uos, siue] iuj gjuļu un . olimpto le ploụ Ámslulw sɔŋsi puțjo 3ówiss siiĝow 1ɔŋŋsiq eleinsey u!3!!!!!!100000 1240 - Ásuo esequis ūs sɔɔɲɔ$ o||q0W ļļo uoŋɔɔuu02 u sluouồsŋjɔapt sý pɔɔuəļu2Au0ɔu!
ɔ, sɔqi; pueig asrindeH ‘şurg5,9|d03& 01 120IJỏ ềusseads suleijó luxuñuộddÈ išsibisuɔulousnɔ Ájuo esequis us »itisq9||0ềeųɛ0 je suɔ nɔɔsɔ J0 ÁIddns Joj tioļštojo quae uoțbuồus suoŋɛŋaus }}}}}}0 1508 oprullo M put offeindeH elimpeg olostirpurgie sɔɔŋJOlsoàɔũius suri sõjɔɔëidos popuolupauoɔussi^uoisno-surg韃|eu0ŋɛN ɔų. Jo įpurig olimpeg où le 1201]]ð susțwak. Initiosios Ápuey us səəŋ0 uouuooop oq us »seid ou stų suri
?I?AæJepung uĮ Įule 1 ut spiroq uolisuusap aarų įou op sosną poslīdos)
τIInpεg
luopuodsɔŋɔɔ
luopuodsɔŋɔɔ
luopuodsɔu0ɔ tsɔsaturpurg juopuodsɔŋ0ɔ bulvāniew
102puodsəu0ɔ ŋɔariepurg luopuullsɔIJU.) epaturpurg luopuodsəuoɔ ŋɔariepurg
luopuodsəuoɔ
luopuodsəuoɔ Ápuey
luapuodsəu0ɔ tsaariepurg
|6'10'9ł XA 16'80’l IXA 1610 ȘI XA [6' | ['o? YMA
16'10'02 XA
| 16'LÜ'$! XIA
1680'{{ XIA
I6'80's. I XIA
[6'80's I XA
#6'80'67 XA
100

ÁįUO PIzquis us OquJ010ɔ uį į00ųos sur I. suspe2| v 01 suas sluopmıs 2ımsu, 01 sulloq - ļļue] us ?|qɛɲɛAv sou sūIJOJ ɔɔueimsus
SUIJOH Iļule 1 0 N · Vlır.Avârstw lɛ ɔɔŋJO SJEusț33× 101.nsłq oq1 \\ ĐỊequis uỊ Áļu0 - ||uz|| uỊ ĐỊqeļļ2A2 10ų suluog opussissy Jųqnae
0qu0|0ɔsa3N OquosoɔSAɔN eáunae ASAạN
(13 (183N SWYIOA SW\!0! 30 38's LVN 3N3HA 30YTāNOLLISOd
Iļue L uį sudo). Jo ÁųIļqelqeae-uoN
ɛɔlɛ ɔq, ut shumel jo uoŋɛŋuɔɔuoɔ e si suɔŋ sɛ ɔɔŋjo sypy spårsjuejaq je siɔɔŋjo ẩusseads-Isulel suļodde 01 ssejjy 2u0H jo 131stuiw 01 poleodde elɔlɔɖ suɔɔusA ‘IW U0,121||qɛŋɔŋ 10J 1913|u|W ɔlɛIS pus sa "W 'Isiq osse?ạy
[sueIus pɔ|d2002 ŝuloq 10u o se sɔɔŋOU Áienųq0 upwa sɛ ɔɔŋJO 150& 2||20 3ųı 01 1201]]0 suņvads - Ļuit. I e lu|0dde 01 sɔŋŋ0ųIme 01 Irodde osvojo sluopisah
ɔīļqnd 8usquads |sur Ljo Uolienuɔɔu0ɔ ɛsɔ ɔɲɔŋɔlɔųM'ısıp vųwduro us 20ņģ0 s, w '0 'w wulƐƐƐÁsg 2ų & Jopijjo ĝuiseads -Isulo I o jo suɔunul0dde susisonbɔi ŋuɔuitųıca u! 90ņou sɔAsō ‘a ‘W uəəpieųng 'W'N ÍeųIŵl
{ , GI?IQXQINNV
luopuodsɔu0ɔ juopuodsɔuoɔ luopuodsɔŋɔɔ tsunar A
lNWNIWT JWOO HO GIWWN
- luopuodsəuoɔ effekļuvuoq
-->luopuodsɔu0ɔ amɛw
|-luopuodsɔŋɔɔ
l6'80'6; XIA 1680'97 XA 68°01’y I XIA
80&s10S
06° 10'9] XIA
1660'$0xA
1690'97 XA
* { '0N
‘ÍVIŅŠIS
sy
O

Page 56
· r rt - -
==تi E. : . . . . : 登、 E F; eKKL0KSLLLLeKKATYLK0YYLLSTTeLKLLLuS ...'
LLeSKLLLLLLLLYLOLLLLkSYeS0sLJAKY0eLeLLS
է:
i
f i
I
;" ;唱。
ቆጅ4ܒܕ.
f
r.; 蛙。”
༣
:
: -
m
品
芷r.
空
慈
لتظل
烹 த் :-. .
سية
και η ** - '' ፵፰ ኻ፧ -- : " - --
oooooooo : عميقة - + " === ':' ஜ் };" , :
:iت i
[ܒ
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHAPTER IX
EDUCATION
Education is directly linked to the implementation of Tamil as an official language. As implementation is a continuous process, thosc competent in the Tamil language have to be produced by schools in a continuous Inanner.
A spate of complaints indicate that all is not well in the state of Tamil medium schools, including both Tamil and Muslim schools, A perusal of Annexures 'A' and 'B' will bear testimony to this appraisal.
We might referespecially to some instances which reveal the denigration of Tamil Inc.dium education. The most affected are, predictably if all the more unjustly, plantation-areaTamil and Muslim students. As the Provincial Council system now oversecs educational issues, an allegation circulates at this writing that Provincial Councils are adopting a step-motherly attitude towards Tamil Medium schools.
Even in the North-Eastern province, graduatics suffer. At this writing, thc island possesses eight thousand unemployed graduates. Out of this population, 350 unemployed graduate-trainiccs are in the North-Eastern Province. Moreover, according to Provincial Education Ministry sources, the North-Eastern Province lacks an additional 479 (cachers. From this 4179, 1472 vacancies are report.cd from Batticaloa District alone, where 59 schools lack permanent Principals. Could not the North-East's 350 unemployed graduate trainees be easily absorbed into the penanent Leachers cadre?
In the Matale District, 152 fewer teachers than are required are currently employed, and this proves a phenomenon not isolated to a single district. Wirakesari's editorials have repeatedly commented on the islandwide shortage of Tamil teachers and lamented this aggravated situation.
David Rasiah, former Menbcrofthe Sabaragamuwa Provincial Council, brought to thc notice of the Provincial Education Minister that in the Kegalle DistricL, vacancies for 206 Tamil cachers existed. Rasiah also criticized the indifference shown to Muslim schools. He was supported by another member, Janab Niyas A.Cader. In the interim, no primary school teachers have been appointed in Sabaraga Tuwa.
O3

Page 57
Kegalle District proves pertinent for other reasons. Due to a politico's intervention, forty Tamil teaching appointments were suspended. Minister Thondaman was informed of this misplay.' When Deraniyagala's A.G.A. Division ignored fourteen qualified Tamil teachers during its interview process, Thondaman intervened and eleven were called for interview.0
Shortage of teachers reveals the shortage at higher levels of administration. Even in the Sri Lanka Education Administrative Service (SLEAS), Tamils and Muslims are not adequately represented. Five Tamil Members of Parliament made a joint complaint to the Ministry of Education: in Grade I of the SLEAS, out of sixty in the cadre, there are only three Tamils and one Plantation Tamill with no Muslims employed. This composition means that 5%. Sri Lankan Tamils and 1.333% Plantation Tamils are employed. The percentage, while obviously a distortion of national percentages, remains similarly low in other grades.
Uva Province fares no better than Kegalle. Virakesari's editorials expressed concern about Uva's deterioration and requested authorities to improve the situation. 12
At the uppermost level which unfortunately often enough is the final marker of a pupil's success, the Department of Examinations is reported to have been unmindfu) of the requirements of Tamil-speaking candidates. For example, on August 11, 1990, at the Grade 5 Scholarship Examination held at the Nawalapitiya Centre at which a majority of Tamil-speaking students were registered, no Tamil-speaking questioners were present and all announcements were in Sinhala only. 13
The nation's gatekeepers undergo similar neglect. An examination was held to select Authorized Officers for the Department of Immigration and Emigration. In the Government Gazette, Part II of June 18, 1990, the notification regarding this examination stated that it would be held in Tamil also. However, when Tamil-speaking candidates arrived at the Examination Hall, they found the question papers to be only in Sinhala and English. As there were no question papers in Tamil, Tamil-speaking questioners and examinees both were rendered helpless to administer and take the exam.4 At Cloden Estate's G.C.E. (O Level) Examination Centre in December 1990, with no Tamil-speaking questioners appointed, students had more than a difficult experience.
Moving from plantation-area education to more centralised agencies such as the Education Department, we note the frequency with which, when 104

the Department does orchestrate events in Tamil Medium schools, Tamil is not given its duc placc. On January 22, 1990, at the function organised at the Bandarawela M.M.V. to commence the eleventh distribution of free books by President Premadasa, all programmes were only in Sinhala; even the cultural programs at this event were not in Tamil. 16
From October 15 to 21, 1990, the Education Department held the Education Development Week at Matugama Ananda Sastralaya. There are 170 area schools of which twenty-five are Tamil or Muslim schools. Not only was no circular regarding this function issued in Tamil; not only did no Tamil teacher play a role in any of the organising Committee, but no announcement ever appeared in Tamil, leaving an entire population once again greatly disappointed. 7
Besides such collective disappointment, essential notices regarding cducation can fail to be communicated. At the Wattala Tamil Vidyalaya, all records of students, all letters to parents, including all scouting and insurance instructions, appear in Sinhala only.18
Linguistic discriminationeasily physicalises itsclfintophysical neglect; an entire community's needs can be willed to be absent, ignorable. For examplc, the reputed Mannampitiya Tamil school, established in 1892, has only fourteen teachers for three hundred students who must suffer a further indignity in sharing a single toilet. 19 Residents of Alawattugoda in the Harispathuwa Electorate appealed to A.C.S. Hameed, then Minister of Justice and Higher Education, to establish a Tamil school. 20 Though Hameed gave two and a half lakhs of rupees and a single acre of land, the Education Department had done nothing after the lapse of at least a month.2 Residents are forced to conduct a small Grade 1 to 5 school in the Muthumari Amman Temple premises; though there are two volunteer teachers for seventy-five students, these students will not be able to enter Grade 6 at another school. Why? They will lack formal recognition of this grassroots rectification of governmental lapse. 22
This slippage of Tamil education between regulatory cracks is no infrequent phenomenon, and in its consequences replicates governmental equivocation on the linguistic issue. Consider that between Koslanda and Wellawayathere reside over one thousand Tamil-speaking students. Lacking a Tamil Medium school, these students are forced to study in Sinhala,23 What more reprehensible way can a State enforce discriminatory policy than by a smooth-talking and hence benign-seeming neglect?
105

Page 58
When two wings of local or central government possess different agendas and fail to work together, the best of plans-representing the aspirations of child, well-meaning teacher, administrator and bureaucratcan fall by the wayside. A request to establish a Tamil school at Ovilikanda in Matale District has been on the books for years. Yet students from Ankumbura, Uggala-Ovilikanda, Enasalmada, Udawatta, Hettipola, areas have no governmental support for their education. Residents run a private school at the Sri Balasubramania Temple premises, with the dismal teacher to student ration of three volunteer teachers to about 140 students.
In 1989 the Matale District Development Council voted 518,725 rupees for a school's construction in this area. Unfortunately, the State Plantations Corporation failed to donate land for this purpose, and the project had to be abandoned. After continued agitation by those concerned, the authorities have, at this writing, agreed to offer a bit of land.24
Plantation Tamil children in the South are not given opportunities to study in Tamil.25 At the Child Care Centres run by the Janatha Estates. Development Board, as in Ukkuwela, only Sinhalese-speaking girls are appointed to look after the children. Though one finds no shortage of unemployed if educated Tamil-speaking girls, they are not appointed.26 This discrimination controverts one of the most accepted principles of mother-tongue education: that, say, Tamil-speaking children should not be forced to have their basic education in Sinhala. In the interest of cultural preservation, as the majority of these children are Tamils, Tamil teachers should be appointed.
Where are these Tamil teachers? One case might suffice. On October 11 and 12, 1991, Tamil applicants for admission to Hatton, Batane Sri Pada College for Teachers were not summoned for interviews. Consequently, then-State Minister of Education Mrs. R. Pulendran ordered an inquiry.27
Where are the Tamil schools? In the bitter year of 1983, in Chilaw District, an attempt to close down a Tamil school called Egodawela Tamil Vidyalay was made. In 1987, the government successfully managed to "close" the school, only for it to be immediately reinstated as a Sinhala Medium school. Education Officers withdrew Tamil books issued to students and, to 220 Grade I students, distributed instead Sinhala books. At this writing, this was only the most recent of a series of unconscionable attempted school "conversions" in this region since 1956. Reports abound of attempts to "close down"Tamil schools at Thoppu, Munnakkarai, Beach
106

Road, Manatchenai and Thuwanai in the Negombo District. Allegations continue that Tamil schools are purposely understaffed while Muslim schools are overstaffed with Tamil teachers.28
Onclose examination, we find the state of Muslim schools to be equally appalling. During a Southern Provincial Council meeting, Member Janab M.M. Razik revealed that though there are thirty-three Southern Provincial Muslim schools, during the preceding ten years no Southern Muslim student has entered universities for Science, Maths or Commerce courses. Further, in addition to a general lack of qualified teachers, there is only one girls' school in Galle and one in Welligama. At Matara and Hambantota each, a girls' school is required.
Sarath Gunawardena, another member, supported Janab Razik, adding that affluent Muslim students could choose to attend Mawanella and Kalmunaischools whilepoorer children suffered. Gunawardenaalso charged that the government conveniently forgets estate Tamil schools during the appointment of teachers, leaving most estate schools understaffed. 29
Janab Razik expressed the same sentiments when he declared open the Science Laboratory at the Horagoda Muslim Maha Vidyalaya in Matara District for which he gave 85,000 rupees from funds allocated to him. Razik lamented that Muslim schools suffered from a lack of buildings, furniture, science equipment and other amenities.30 Lacking facilities to study in Tamil in the vicinity of their residence, Muslim students are compelled to study in Sinhala. Further, even students so educated were being admitted to Kalutara District Sinhala schools only on a percentage basis. In the leading schools in Kandy, Muslim students are being pressurised to study Buddhism as their subject for the Religion course.32 .
In Deniyaya, one teacher at volunteer- and parent-run St.Matthew's Tamil School teaches three hundred Grade 1 through 10 students.33
While the Education Service Commission's Development Division published a book of guidelines in Tamil for new teachers, its twenty-eight pages bear 1,500 mistakes, as the Sri Lanka Tamil Teachers' Union's General Secretary informed the Commission.3
Consider the rhetoric surrounding the appointment of Tamil teachers to estate schools in the Western Province's Kalutara District. While all other concerned Provincial Councils appointed teachers in July, 1991, the Western
107

Page 59
Province Education Ministry gave appointments only in October, 1991. According to the affected parties, the delay stemmed from the Western Province Education Ministry being ignorant of the existence of estates and estate schools in its governed province.
This ignorance typifies the negligence with whicheducation authorities, ministries and departments handle Tamil medium education outside the North-East Province. Former Central Province Chief Minister P.B. Dissanaike stated the relevance of education in Tamil to the implementation of Tamil as a language of administration:
The right to the use of the Tamil language is a fundamental right of the Tamils. We are endeavouring to implement the use of Tamil in our Council. I admit that practical difficulties have arisen because we do not have officers conversant in Sinhala and Tamil. An examination was held to select Tamil officers for appointmcnt to local bodies. There was no one who qualified. Only those with four credit passes at the G.C.E.(O/L) could apply for this examination. At the examination held for this selection, no one was qualified to be selected.35
With this lack of qualified Tamil-medium graduates, it should prove no wonder that M.S. Sellasamy complained, during a meeting of the Western Province Tamil School Federation of SDSS, that the Colombo Education office is unable to implement Tamil as an official language because thercare no Tamil translators, stenographers and typists.36
NOTES
Sunday Times, 8.12.91
2 Virakesari, 26. 1 1.9
3 Virakesari, 22. 10.91
4 Virakesari, 26.1 1.91
5 Virakesari, 6. 8. 91
6 Virakesari, 9. 4.91
108

10
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Virakesari, 1 1. 3.88, 7. 4.88
Virakesari, 22. 1.90
Virakesari, 6. 1.90
Virakesari, 2. 1.90
Virakesari, 13. 12.90
Virakesari, Editorial, 18. 10.90, 13. 12.90
Virakesari, 15.8.90
Virakesari, 27. 9.90
Virakesari, 14. 12.90
Virakesari, 23. 1.90
Virakesari, 27. 10.90
Virakesari, 27. 10.90
Virakesari, 4. 4.89
Virakesari, 24. 3.89
Virakesari, 5.1 1.90
Ibid
Nithiananthan, Mrs.Jothy, Virakesari, 18.12.90
Virakesari, 26.1 1.91
Rajah, V.S., Letter to Hon.M.S.M.Aboosali, Hon.Minister in charge., Virakesari, 6.11.91
Virakesari, 5. 10.88
Virakesari, 8. l 1.9 l
109

Page 60
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Vaikasi Visakan, Virakesari, 13.3.89
Virakesari, 4. 1.90
Thinakaran, 23.1091
Thinakaram, 30.1091
Nesan, Oct. - Nov. 1991
Thinakaram, 16.1091
Mahasivam, T., Virakesari, 6.1091
Dissanaike, P.B., Virakesari, 24. 10.91
Sellasamy, Hon.M.S.Virakesari, 3.1 1.90
10

ɔɔŋ0 u0ụexmp3 uĮ 1201]]0 suņvads puri ON
pɔlɔɔJJe ÁIpeq uoției, mpg 'suɔŋɔrɔw 9 (quo
· II (10 01 dm səsstp 100ųɔs llur 1 I Áțuo
sluopmıs Ilule 1 J0 Jouɔq 2ų joj eseļoÁpỊA eqɛW ļļulo Le joj pəəN
100ųɔs Álbuția Ițuiel e joj pəəN
JJens iuņeods sue 1 ON - Áțuo ețequis uį suɔŋɔwɔ1 01 luxuluĮodde jo suɔmɔT
seoir įvumusey 'elloubarw 01 ŝuļ03 sluppmıs uỊsmW ‘A ‘W unipou Isus I pɔɔpɔU - Isny oN
uisismW ņog - sese||espỊA Isuelt ájuou ao loIsràɔx j02|0ųM 'Isule 1 Z - $100ųɔs tus|smw tuɔų jo y "TJO Įssa 9 Áțu0-112 u, s[00ųɔs 99 - sį00ųos llues up SɔssɛIJ ‘Iyw Joj sɔŋŋɔɛJ ON
INIWT&W00 HO THQIWN
epariepurg
įeleduy
epaeuzpueg/elimpeg
earlesesiq
enprannwg
ɔɔuļA0, tuɔ, sɔM
vanuviumqes
WƆƆIV NO T00 HOS HO SIWWN
joispo os romars - 3\sqa)
J01įp3 01 121137 · 31|qna
|pun00 (01), eam - Jøsslulw
eam ‘rollpun00 sepula0i,
Jollpunoɔ pɛsɔuļA01) ɔɔuįA0, u1o1s2M
Josipun00 supayao,
NOILISOd
Įuļļu-M
Jesɛsɛsɛn, "A
qeiddus 'w (w
uequeueųųqɔɲɛS ’S 'IW
luopuodsɔuoɔ
Jople) !mpqW ‘IW
‘O ‘a emmuziejeqes qasses pļAɛOI 'JW
INIWTAW00 310 ȘIWIWN
ə3eņuoqs shooqɔs ɔ ɔɔɛŋuoqS ĮJens - uopeɔnpg
V CIRI[IXC INNV
oos['s, XIA
‘二‘Z0XA
88'04"9, XIA
88'01", XIA
oo'01'0E XIA
88'0\'{| XIA
ŒTOI’WO XIA
ĤORITMOS
1.

Page 61
sɔsinos uzəns Isuel uado o pɔɔN
tpoầniemeļy Uį 100ųos Iļule 1 e 21e21) 0, pɔɔN
situel pur usinputH ‘sųnew opuɔlɔS 10J - suɔɖɔcɔŋ0 232110ųS - sɔssep TJW ||A popeiðdn ɔq 01 szlų 100ųos sỊųI.
osuuɔJỊns sjuåpnis Tsy - uosàɔŋ ɔɖi us $100ųos || Áq p2J - suɔųɔwɔı şI Áquosiopeo) 09:1pɛɔpɔA0iddy - sluapnis 00ZI
メẩusia]]ns sluopmıs T/y - suɔųɔrɔı SI suo - sjælpeal & - aiņus) pɔAQuddy
Tsy 01 dm sassep - IIe uļ ȘI - olempel? I kļuo - suapmıs 991
siɔɔnunțoa z piir iaiņsal pouseil e pur sedipuția - suɔŋɔbɔi z Ájno
sluapnis 0$I joj suɔɖɔtɔ, z ÁỊuo
Ásuo esequis us luas lɔɔųS p10ɔɔŋ slidna 1eqi usælduI0ɔ nɑ maņieỊnw Jo sỊrdpusų
ɔɔuįA0Jd 3 - N ɔpısıno sɔŋssionium
epoồnıæArsy
'pIA ĮĮulo I eindeuses
‘IG 2Ásg eienamn ‘A ‘W Iļuel ekoỊmpuna
‘A ‘W sime I nddøpm
‘A ‘W Ilule i nddepm
{’ICI VJ2|2]]m)] 'płA ļļuzi mpzalearN
100ųɔS Iļuel Jizso xɔŋlɔɑ essežejoy
maŋse||mw
’di ‘’W
pɔɔuzh 'S "O w ruoh 01 se3ddy
&Ommg 01 &mi&T
Joııp3 01 jamɔT - ɔŋqna
10lıp3 01 12113T - ɔŋqnae
弘忍加。 J01|pq 01 jamɔT - 21|qnae
ɔyɛÁrưemy ouw
“W ‘H ‘W’ A urmeņouzW , !
uereqomew ‘I luopuodsəuoɔ uereqouzw 'L ripturned‘ı +
luopuodsəuoɔ
6870’90 XA
68'{0's, XIA
60'$0 }'I YA
68°00’80 XIA
68'{0} HI XA
68°10'6I XIA
68°10'6; XIA
だ
68’40’LI YA
68°10'00 XIA

pəluįodde osse slepos quem suapısın0 00£| - suɔųɔwɔ1 sɛɔ0I 0ÇI Áļu0- suellsựųƆ %7 - sjɔųɔɛɔn mpus H (56 - $12ųɔwɔ1 0çys lle up
quouseon Áțuoqoui - dois siajāɔu - sỊ00ųɔs unipɔu lluel jo mų31ļd ɔŋ sɔ10ţdɔɑ
sɔɛsɛlɔ 9 10 01 dm Áļu0 - 112, sedibuţia - sjøllenò ON - pļo sup2Á 0ç - suɔŋɔwɔi ɲɔɔnunț0A Áļu0 - sluopmıs 00ç - AW ||ule 1 2uuəlståndtH
siue 1 us 9q os sue|nɔŋɔ Joj s||ro uosinț0səŋ - Áļu0 ețequis us $100ųɔs unipou suel on sue|nɔŋɔ sɔsoldɔɑ
ÁnsȚuțW u0ļ120mpg Áq ÁĽuo esequis us suɔųɔɛɔɔ ɔlɛmpeià put suɔŋɔtɔɔ ŋuje s os suɔunusodde jo siɔŋɔn
į00ųɔs sų, 10u inq sầusų 1ɔų10 uo sųMwį spuɔds Ánųoụınɛ ɖɔmɛųww. - suauenb ou - 131101 | KỊuo - suɔųɔɛəı și Ásuo - suɔpnis 00£ - T/O 01 dn sɔssel) - sup2Á Đ0ł äuțJe2N - Z631 us pɔqsisq21sg
Áļu0 vyrųuis ut piz Sjeịnɔŋɔ Áussius W uoụɛɔmp3 12q, uie|duoɔ spɛdʊusid
og eksig-wueramN
Ielau99
eindeunes
|e12u39
100pş sınırı esnįduleuuew
ɔɔuļA0id Q -N
ɔsɔļuwuzonulmuy oxí |eļJ01!pg jɔmɔTeumiex izpụS
ssəıầuoƆ uoŋɛɔmp3
•uĮsmW U0|Áɔɔ IIY
•luopuodsəuoɔ
ɔsɔŋuwutståejdpuy (y
|-suɔpuodsɔJJ0ɔ Jm||2N
69'90’01XA
68'90’80 XA
68'90, 10 XA
68°90’07 XA
68'$0’01 XHA
68'90’90 XA
68’y0'00 XA
13

Page 62
ÁĽ0 esequis uį - suɔŋɔwɔi loj uðilæumoyo jo luauduodisod al sınırı
suɔŋɔrɔ ŋuiel jo sisod joj
siuzpl|dde01 wstąūIsusuɔssiɔmɔtsɔiosdaq
ɔɔuỊAoid eam us ssnmps uį sɔɔuɔŋuɔAu0ɔus loq10 put suɔŋɔwɔı JO 232110Įs jo sır|nɔŋmd ŝuŋɔɔIsoɔ
He us sluopmıs 0007
• sjælpe?! olempel? ON Tfy iis ol
sluopuis $7 · ‘A ‘W Ilule 1 p00AJON (Z)
JJess u0 Áļu0 1ɔɖɔɛɔi lɔɔlumĮ0a i put suɔŋɔrɔ1 ɔlɛ sɔ y - pəusen qsỊầuq ! 'pousemajuəļos Iesposz-suɔŋɔwɔ, jo ɔɲɛŋ0ųsooq us T/O (som suapmıs 0$$ - (pIA Įulo I ețearuusa (I)
sầustuos uoqs jąņ0 pue suɔɖɔwɔ, jo ɔivijoļs
s||easid 23euoqs siaqɔwɔ, ing - ɔsɔqi Oslo sɔssæIO TIO - (pIA Įulo Isapunw
pɔsinjoi 34 ismu usynpuțH qɔrɔı ol lu212duI09230 ||- sloqɔrɔnjoluaulīnijai us
ɔɔuỊA01, eam
Į00ųɔS poomuoN ‘eļenaruusae
op|A simul spesesuɔŋɔ
|ɔpunw
įeinu.29
Jollpunoɔ ɲɛsɔuỊA01ų
JɔŋɔT
rəmri
1ɔŋɔrs
1ɔŋɔrs
·10ɔ ndërpm
țesuonipɑ
uzņmri2A y
uereqomew 'l qe{vmatsu os uesos suỊA
quțeleaapeņas y
心萼5冷泛y 68'80's, XIA 6'O'TXA
68'80'80 YIA
6900EXA
|(90’Sİ YTA
68'90? I XIA
68'90?) YA
67
’,
14
 

ɔımınj put smıtış sıĮ JO 1ųầıld þes
6g'zrçĮ uo suɔuziţied us superduoɔ-vjequis mous lou0pɔm ɔsne324 Knumoɔ uao uį suɔầuens sm 2 seu 1,000 - quo esequis us suoissmɔsip pued suos!Apw (nslutw sule]]v svinism) put uongonpa
(sepuue?] 'n','ıW 1ɔquaw 0’a ‘a’M Áquieldu00 e uo) sầuipsinq asu osse - sluəpnis Istriel jo ujauɔq ɔų. Joj vlnit M us op|A situel sɔuuw is uado 01 uoŋɛɔmp3 Jo 131slulýN ruohol sɔsua ueuzpu0ųL 'S ‘00H
suapmıs 00Z 12A0 - sloụ3e3! ou stų į00ųɔs ɔltisq 112)||20. ellemestow
luautųıca uļ uzas? uoņsɔmb Jo ɔɔnoN - siaqɔwɔ1 s sluo saou - siosoɛɔi gz ualue2 - səsses) iz - sluopmıs 006
1ɔŋɔŋɔ, I suo noN - suɔɖɔwɔl ɛ puɛ sɛdpuụd | 21ɔm ɔlɔų laiļieg - pīA Įulelossued0
232||0ɔ |sippo21 Áț¢[23
12ur). Áuosiapw
zīmes opta llur 1 s,ɔuuW ‘IS
sooqɔs ɔltisq qo,loq
‘A ‘W ļļuel elusse4
·pi/) situal ayırdedo
JɔŋɔT
2ırış 10 121stuiw odoH
qsouro 'S 'N
rapeutsvowių‘i’w
suɔpuodsəŋ00
luopuodsəuoɔ cultimew
12a2zy "W 'How qtues
nuopuodsɔu00
63')|['0£ XA
6$', '91 XA
68', los I XA
68's l'$7 XA
68:0ZXA
68'80's, XA
115

Page 63
mosq01d Bpeds smosios e sporowl tiulpųnq Iseus į Kțuo įtras ou Jo si onoīdus o siodde - pia puey estùdsesand - 100ųɔs ɔuo suos! orasųsoinsɔ ti əlɛ ələŋ ŋinsip viņaessay up
soirniuks 201ų. It us aq IIIa suilogije les sosluloid virpurqnyon ruoh 05:00z vo supuessed us & W qesziļņruas starw ‘’W Áq iueurspraus uolisonb : suunasuy
$ $6; Joje pɔsop sỊ00ųos se uɔđ0-31 os uoŋɔɔ olenius on uzurpuoụI souos os poddy
|sure i uį ssurillJ0210A Áļu0-Isules us sɔumɛifford leumismɔ uɔnɔ sou esequus ut sɔtuuleuảoud IIe - Áɔdɔɲɔɔya sıH sq sqooqɔɔŋ Jo uoụnquisìp 10] 'A W W epaturpurg osì le possue310 UOųoun; ɔų ly
^2\AJøju! Joj poľseo alɔm II suo laivT (Imbu, possuoiduosebnpajo 101ɔɔnɑ ɑwosqaq pouəajoļus ueniepuolų "Souoh-saalaisiui Joj poliep 100 ɔjɔa Áɔŋ pɔŋŋɛmb ɔlɔA SQUIRI Állum00 -đm și ținoqlly
13ịnsIg espanssıay
sejauɔɔ
£86|| Jolje pɔsɔsɔ sloops
‘A ‘’W WopmæJepung
sluotinusodde ĵusųɔtɔI
luopuodsæIjo) tuvassy
od si qrstuļņruas starw trys
‘a ‘M til signem; |suosieomp3 u0 10slapy ɔwɔopuruan utstų is
JuəpuodsəJuoɔ
luopuodsəŋ0ɔ ŋwãessupiaq
06'{0'90 XA
0670 IZ MA
06° 10'67 XA
06 IO ȘI XIA
06° 10'90 XA
6

suɔŋɔɛɔ, jo 23ɛŋoqs e kpeɔŋɛ s! 213ų, uoqae siɔ pɛɔI JO 1ɔjsuen isuježe sisa101d (13100$ iugud019A3G 100ų3S
{100$ ɔules qsisqe/s201 sɔsiu10.Jd KurseII2S ‘S’W ‘uos reselle M uį ‘A ‘W ||uz| e |0 00ņɛɔlɔ
ɔų joj svodde Áı9100S olejI2M mpūIH
suɔųɔwɔn 200ui sluta - sluppmıs 0ŞI JOJ Jɔtsɔsɔŋ | oluşsaldır-suɔŋɔwɔıļ0Áɔɔmbɔpeus pə10Ịdɔp utasszņeş’S ‘JW JOllpun0ɔ sɛsɔułA0Jd
ordə0 uoụɛɔmpɛ ɔŋ Áq joj pouvo sou sɔŋsiɑ ɔųı us $100ųos įlule 1
siɔŋɔwɔ1 on - sluppnis įsmel ktiew
'sluopmıs 0$$ Joj suɔŋɔwɔ1 s (suo ɔlɛ ɔlɔɖɔ ɔɔuss 100ųos Żusuɔmɔ ɔų jo ainsop Jeaj sluəpısal suel 'suure I noņeļuzsā oļi jo uoŋtɔmp3 Əŋ spisao: »ouələŋspus s'idəG uoueo.mp3 Əŋ pɔ10ịdəputulepü0ųL’S’U0H
pɔɔuəļu-au0ɔu; ɔųqnae - 23ænäuel sebujo se posm župQ sou sį suel izqı sıɔɲɔŋ
脚燕) eẤvpekpia uesɔŋŋɛyʊ
vịcảeksueləq
eszmes
$£3]? uoŋɛnuela ? Ápuey
10ļJIsiq uJesɛmnd vulcâniew - 100ųɔS Įtuel
ɔɲɛɲsg ɔpuexe||W.
espaessay opļA ĮUIEL SÁJoW ‘IS
|213u90
sɔInstq ulelemma
1011100m00 ‘A0IJ '&M
Jənə’s
luapuodsəuoɔ esɛɲɛÁļuvuod
luopuodsɔIJOɔ - urīnāmsN IIS quəpuodsɔŋ00
luopuodsɔŋɔɔ kpuey
luopuodsɔŋɔɔ uolemnd
sepuues ‘YI ‘N ‘JW
luopuodsɔŋɔɔ ɛɲɔMessỊAy
luopuodsɔuJ0ɔ Ápuey
sellidumqueq
06°90’lı XIA
I6's s’90 XA 0690'{Z XA
06°90’6|| XHA 06'90'l į XIA 06'$0 07 XA
06000£ XA
06'{0'0; XIA
06°90'60 XA
17

Page 64
'stuossoid 2p olus soos o pɔlɔɔıp sua oHo iussoid osso uosieɔnpa jo lɔisiujų Iesoulaoid · Ijuis Jaņ0 put siapası omțuind 'spurt 'siulpųng - uontong us suo qoid ole ajoļi irų, uripusing Áresourueses 'sw uontonpą jo 13ısının oleīS'uoH OI use|duoɔ sluopisɔu wan
Oslo Isuzlu! panssi aq IIIa sızınɔŋɔ |lo sessi siopo pur sjølstuw g (q pas U0țiełoI3p ɔMɔ ɛ pɔınssaĮøpmuļırımụy ĻIET UOH 1913|u|Wuontonpa
poligin, 10u uolivisão suoi pɔlɔɔyɛ 5100ųos [suw] put uļļinwot Joao jo sluopmis-Ázar saņu zi-starez10nloq pur eqoloo 01 03 01 ɔArq shuapmısuoueo.mp3 lossung 10+ɛlɔɓurinâueshuŋpunoje sporeus $100ųos huel, ou ɔlɛ ɔjɔųI- 9 aprio ol đn Ájuo sɔsses? 'pīA ĮurJ. eloqeaạH ɔų) sy
sɔsɔɛlɔ susuɔmɔ suo aou-soops |url olevados e joj sluaird (qu0ŋɛŋãy
sɔsɔŋɔ ɔuļuənə suo nou-sooņos Ismael oleredos e joj sluaird squoŋɛŋãy
ɔɔuțA0ų van
sejau20
elɔɖemɔH
esņidmeny
wÁņįdujemy
rossos
SAɔNluopuodsɔu0ɔ
SMɔNluopuodsɔŋɔɔ luopu0dsɔu0ɔ ŋwàɔŋrțeleasas os
luopu0d521100 tpazītpurg
luopuodsɔŋ0ɔ ɛsɔArjepurg
06°90’lo XIA
0690'$Z XA
06°90’S, XA
06'90'$7 XA
06'90 ȘI XA
118

suɔŋɔwɔ, jo qầmouɔ 10N - sluapnis 00çĮ
ɔɔuỊA0J& 3ų) UN SĪĻUdo L 2ų jo spəəu uoŋɛɔmp3 2ųı on ŝulpuɔmɛ 100 joj sɔŋŋɔŋmɛ uoŋɛɔmp3 'sɔzʊŋŋɔ
ɔàɔ||0ɔ sɔɔɖɔɛ91 poặpọU-||n] e (†) puc sựulo I JOJ Jɔısmț3 - ɔɲɛlɛdəs (£) suɔųɔɛɔ ɔjou (z) Ánum03-dm us $10ụısıQ ||2 uį ’A ’A ’W ļļule 1. (!) poluoso pue u011ɛɔmpą JOJ 3121S J0 121stus w ‘u0H 19u Áueueềssenųjųınd'ıW JOIII)umoɔlɛsɔuļA01) ÁpueX oueųınɛlɔA ‘X 'Iw 101110un03 |espuțAola eam puɛ Áue12.jpɔS Áq pəl u0, un suɔx10À ĐỊesso ItuoseN JO u0ņeảosop W
sluopmıs suis I į0 ljøuoq ɔų. JOJ PÁųɔystw us !?!!!W lutes uỊ ‘A 'W ||ue 1 ( 212310 01 sɔŋŋ0ųIme UOne2.mp3 un sựðdde ssəuầu0) [duomeN SAJOAA J0 JaņeluɔsɔJdəH ‘Isiq selepuļA00 ’S
xij e us suəųɔɛ31 Isuel - Ásuo esequis us suesnoj!) IIV
· ļļuel joj ope|d oN - eļļA0ųɔɑ sɛ ɔɔŋJO 1ɔısmĮ0 UO1120mpg 3ų] us $1201}}0 \\u1o1 ON
‘A ‘W wuɔɔsinpew
eam
szəly uouzluesa
ekųɔssew
thịw0țų20
smɔN
SA3N
SAɔN
Sa3N
quapuodsəuoɔ
Izụ01ịp3
luopuodsɔŋ0ɔ
luopuodsɔu0ɔ
nuopuodsɔuoɔ eļešektuelaq
IᏛᎬ0Ꮫ80 XIM
06'01"$1 XA
06'80'60 XÍA
06'80’90 XIA
06° 10'll XIA
119

Page 65
onoj poleo 10N 'OI aprio os da sassep oso!!!!!pej 110dsuen oN (punoii-szid 10 sollenò oso!!!!!ɔŋ rəlɛA ON ‘qsijầuq pur |suoi 'sqleW opuɔsɔS joj siaqɔtɔ pəuien UɔAo loNosioqɔwɔlɔitnperä on siopeoi și Álü0 sluopmıs 0001 inoqy (joisej sleiss de ut susuonoun, pia siue1 wisnuring
ềuļ0ễ 100ųɔs ɔų dɔɔ, srɔŋɔrɔl Joosuñ10A Áļu0- sıɔŋɔwɔ10N-uoŋuɔŋɛ sur Áed sou op sɔŋụ0ųınıu0ņeðmp3 uəısmıɔ !oumusulules slųāļu st sooụɔs ɔų. Kdnɔɔɔ olnej Áeils ‘pɔɔuaj lou si is sy'100Ų ɔųı wo so sluopniSolmsung oN $ aprio quo 'siuopms 00II ’09 x 0, \upsinq ouo quo '$100ųɔS J0 Jɔısmıɔ leimuvuuies 1apun souos pur Isiq seleduy us care durɔ Ionuoɔɔɓoɔsops! 'plaisur Inpeuruey
uɔupiųɔ Isosh Jo uoŋɛympɔ ɔųı inoqe pəuloa šiuosed - siopeo, 6 Ásuo - sluopmıs ogọ
sỊe2dde osluolo]]|pus siɔɔŋjo uoŋtɔmp3 - sloupe.31 10 Đảeuoụs sigųɔrɔıųsųầuq puo sựlow ON - 201əuuloɔ șos Tsy 10) soụllpoj ON · 2Át|espỊA suivi i quo
zÁılą wiekann
įeinluvullues
'pțA Įujel ɔyɑoqeļzy
eindeules
1ənərīuzņemunquus or JɔŋɔTųstąeidinry % SAɔNluopuodsɔŋɔɔ kpuey
luopuodsɔuoɔ windeurs sa3Nqefereses A ‘N
16 I I’İ0 XIA
I6's I’I, XIA I6's s’ył XIA
I6'{0,6\ XIA
16′{0'80 XIA
"Z9
120

uoŋɔɛ Áue uɔyɛ, 124 10U seų Álls|u|w. uoueo.mp3 įviousA01) van - səlpnus II2q 2msind 01 sɔɔwỊd JJ0 Jej 01 03 01 2Aeų sluopms jo spɔıpumų se "A 'W e 01 popuầdm į00ųos sių luom sluɔıra
sÁə puisq e suim 1 - ɔɔŋJO UO1122npq 01 sluỊeļduoɔ pəlɛɔdɔn '$1ɔŋɔrɔ1 s KļuU - sluapnus UUz 1240
sluopmıs 000 | J3a0 ]|jouɔq IIIA '100ųɔS ɔyɛlso Jutsuch gųI Įısa suose ɔuoleh le si qsisquis? 01 SJ3ųSIM-IIɔA Áq pappɔp
sew II · Ápuey, ul. ’A ’W siue] e Joj pɔɔN
osnoyuz ɔlɛ ɔĮdood ‘suoŋɔɔŋɔ ɔuụnp 'A' ‘W lțuit 131|| ựs||quisa on possuoid suɔųno ș usutpu0ųI UOH (pɔŋmbɔɛ puɛ, sɔjɔɛ z ‘A ‘W ļļule 1 2uu21ståndæH OIuĮ sost|espĻA y lle ouļqu0001 postəddɛ əArų sluarea ‘A ‘W Iļuel eindeuses 01 03 01 ɔɔŋuɔs sną 13đoid oNopỊA Quiz L esimɔŋɔmɔA put 'psa [[ue] vềueảies op! A Ilule 1 epuessuɔųɔW opiĀ Ļue I vuuɔpnunuy 'suɔpnis 000Į šulųcio L'Aqu0ç ɔpɛ10 01 dm sɔsses) qisa sesoļosp;A (suivi s alw arasų
'płA [luIol oranŋɔxɔɲɛɑ
'pya [suis L esņidossos
‘A ‘W ļļule I. Ápuey
‘A ‘W situel zuuəlswändes,
ŋuɔpuodsɔuoɔ ɛjɔmɛrɛpueg16 II"?! XIA'99 nuopuodsɔŋɔɔ ɛındzuleyiślow0xA"Ç9 16′Zİ'10 NXII.
·100 esparinn16'80'0€ NÓI
I6's I'8 I XIA nuppuodsɔuoɔ kpury1680 10 YIA`ክ9
smɔN suɔpɑodsɔuoɔ eindeuses 16:10,90 x Aoso
12

Page 66
'pɔsɔɔjɛ ɔle suapmıs jo oppipumų so suņvisão osse out suɔlɛdɔųI. 'eioosoleulæS Áələä '1M 'Joissusw Jasųɔ eAn 0] [22dde on pəAI0səI ÁIsmoulupun oqoS ɔɖl 'pi A [suo], e qsųqensa 01 sdals oxei ol riepura ose||eses (W Usulițel10 2ų pɔsin uwopeầueş ş’N JW JoquoW eqɛS PÁųsɔpɛ ɑ ɔsɛ ndɛH
'pțA Įuje] eweļejekiq
luopuodsɔII0ɔ opazīspurg luopuodsɔŋ0ɔ ɔIzımdır.H
[6'[['ZZ YA
, [60]', NO!
'19
122

sulɔļq01d smosios sių 01 UAbip sa a 'W ‘IsIG 3||233}| ? Álisquis uoliepmp3 J0 ư0ņuɔŋw 'quimp 3uỊdɔɔx ndoq uoụwɔmpg
· ɔɔɛdɛ ɔsembəpeuI '009 ɔɔuepuənɛ Áņep 23euɔAe Kepol 'Åsuo suɔpnis 00Z JOJ 03ɛ subok çZ dn imdžupųnq 100ųɔş
sɔŋŋ0ų\ne 01 opeu suomenuɔsɔudələılds us uɔxɛɲ uoŋɔɛ oN (2sdeiloɔ ɲɛɔu Âupųnq pso
ɔimilunj jo Xɔɛ| pur sup|smq Į00ųɔs JO UOų puoɔ pɛ ɑ 2ımıĮuinį į0 xɔŋ pur ŝulpųnq 100ųɔs ɔsdziļ00 go ɔlɛıs up sầuiplinq pļo suwɔÁ 0$ psA issue I, 3x souođô
'u04102 suņsɔmbɔu ÁJIssusw 01 131137 - 232100Ų ? sisessa 3uļxɔɛjɔ nno-ujosa “y001 ON ‘suɔpnis Ozy
• 09'10"$1 UO ‘IA00 Áq 19A0 uɔɖɛI Į00ųɔS
INIWTd W00 30 $s\\[\]\WN
saɔN Áų20 - Ng uzurseusųL - NXL gesɔsɛŋA • XA : 310N
'p! A situal w}{w^țqaqnuopuodsəuoɔtų molqoq I6'80'0€ NOI*9
opsA issueI. ɔueueg eỊ0dɛyɛlɛA$A3Nluopu0dsɔu0ɔ ɔIļzsoy06's I’97 XA'9
Į00ųɔs əlɛ153 seļaujųjeupla‘S 'q ‘Ş Kızı3.153$įeinų eki ‘W 06 ZI" IZ MA'y opțA Iļulo] [[2A2||2MJɔŋɔT'30 ‘MA ’0 68'Zİ'0£ XIA's ɔɲɛưedtywɔpuodsɔuɖɔ 6rgo', XA's
'pțA Įluloj,·\u014 uoŋɛlɔqįT
Áunqsuɔɔnòįeinųnɔŋày Áue12.139S eilalba 'T'A 65'90's I XA* I W3MW NO'0N TOO HOS HO & WWN NOILISOd LNW NIWT IW00 H0 :IWWN30 NQOS Į TWIŅĶIS
sầuỊpisng uoŋɛɔnpŢI {{ CINIȚIX CINNV

Page 67
Conclusions and Recommendations
This study is based on complaints relating to non-implementation of Tamil as official language invarious spheres. In an attempt at concision, the data here represented comes from material which appeared in a single newspaper, the Virakesari. Nonetheless, it is pertinent to point out that similar, corroborative reports did appearin other contemporary journals, the Thinakaran and the Thinapathy.
I undertook a detailed ten-year study of the functioning of the Ministry of Tamil Language Implementation between 1978 and 1988 to show the inaction of the Ministry during a critical period in the nation's history. decade of inaction points to the inescapable fact that the function of this Ministry was to see that Tamil language provisions were not inpiemented.
The present move to implement the provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment has to be viewed against this background of bureaucratic inaction. That at this writing, Sinhala and Tamil are being taught to public servants and children in schools is certainly a welcome step in the right direction. Because we see a new generation of children studying both languages willingly, the ghost of Tamilphobia which since 1956 had undermined the progress and prosperity of this country is now proven a creation of the cheap politician. If prejudice does not stir enough to enable the cheap politician to occupy a Parliamentary seat, the more harmonions and equal relations which characterised Sri Lankan society in the precolonial period can once again be ushered in. The country stands a chance of entering an era of peace and prosperity as a nation cohered by the actual ingredients and spirit of unity.
An analysis of what is going on at the time of this writing points to the existence of four situations. They are -
(i) Tamil-speaking citizens are frustrated that the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution granting official status to Tamil language is being ignored. The mass media have effectively insulated the people's voices of grievances from reaching the government.
(ii) Inconsequence, the country stands divided right now. Tamilspeaking citizens agitate for the early implementation of the
124

Sixteenth Amendment of the Constitution. Their grievances remain little-discussed because the Sinhala and English mass media have failed to publicise their cause. The bureaucracy is not prepared even to respond to the call of the Director of Establishments to furnish Tamil-speaking staff and other requirements. Their administration remains their own.
Unless deep and fundamental change occurs in bureaucratic attitudes, it is not possible to implement the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
Recommendations
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Allow those bureaucrats who do not want to fall in line with the Government's languages policy to retire from service;
Immediately purchase the required number of standard keyboard typewriters in Tamil. Supply them to all offices. (Note: This was recommended by the Jayewardene Committee as far back as 1946. Even Tamil Nadu deferred the implementation of Tamil as official language by one year in 1960 in order to get the required number of standard keyboard Tamil typewriters). No implementation is possible without typewriters.
Absorb immediately all those who have passed the full course of Tamil stenography, and Tamil typewriting at the Kokuvil and Sammanturai Technical Colleges as well as the National Apprentice Board and post them to government service.
Select through a competitive examination Tamil stenographers/typists who have obtained certificates at private institutions, if more of them are required.
Release the results of examinations immediately and make selections for appointments.
Reemploy retired Tamil translators and public servants who can do translation from and to Tamil. Training of public servants in both Sinhala and Tamil is not going to solve this immediate problem.
12S

Page 68
Even with this crash program, there is still bound to be a problem. How many Tamil speakers are there today in the Public Service even in the midgrade levels - especially clerical service? This shortage will still affect this process. This is a matter for separate study.
(g)
(h)
Start a course in translation at the University level. To begin with, a diploma course of two years' duration may be introduced. In three years it may be enlarged into a degree course of three years' duration. This will help not only in administration but also in education. Much as contemporary educational material have to be brought within the fold of Sinhala and Tamil languages.
The Official Languages Commission Act No. 18 of 1991 has powers under Article 8(1) and (ii) to appoint Committees to assist the Commission in the discharge of duties. An effective Monitoring Committee has to be appointed immediately if anything meaningful is to be achieved.
Unless these measures are followed, nothing tangible will be achieved. Yet for Sri Lanka to realize a participatory democracy which possesses adequate linguistic representation and brings the country into its dream of national progress, these measures must be followed. Communication is the path of a progressive country: how at this crucial juncture can Sri Lanka not afford to obtain an equitable language policy which implements its long-standing adoption Tamil as an official language?
126

Page 69
| hea aan sa onne ennaire de e a
е се е а е на с. |- als een active in
sations He is G. | ina agam Cill diaid,
Governing Council of Research Sri Lanka Uni)
e Colo a Santa
COL
ISBN 955
Printed by Un
 

public servant no retired age cause after 24 years olas no ene many social and clita - - si a Tele o e e Assee in and a leading member of
580 - 006 - 5
ie Arts (Pvt) Ltd.