|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 1 February 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Remembering Neelan Tiruchelvam : Enmeshing the Exclusive with the Inclusive Observations by LAKSHMAN GUNASEKERA
"They seemed demoralised and dispirited and their eyes were filled with unspeakable sadness." Neelan Tiruchelvam is (still) known more as a constitutional expert, legal scholar, and parliamentarian, but he was certainly not an 'armchair intellectual' (an epithet that armchair cynics love to throw at idealists). That is why he could notice the "unspeakable sadness" in the eyes of refugee children. Why? Because he actually trekked to the Vanni and many other places of devastation or social oppression to see for himself the hard realities of social problems. The quotation is from Neelan's speech in Parliament in November 1996 during an adjournment debate when he commented on the extreme suffering of the lakhs of Tamil refugees displaced by the State armed forces capture of Jaffna. Neelan, whose 60th birthday on January 31st is being observed by his friends and colleagues with various activities, was the genuine intellectual with a creative intelligence that could have easily imagined the suffering of those refugees without having to actually physically visit them. But precisely because of that intelligence and, his very human sensitivity and emotional drive, Neelan simply had to visit Vavuniya. In doing so, he not only 'saw' but he felt the oppression and suffering of the people. Social activist That was Neelan Tiruchelvam the social activist and campaigner. But how could a man who ran his own legal firm, served on parliamentary committees, ran or helped run several research and social action organisations and projects both here and abroad, who would dash to Tokyo and back in less than two days and then rush to New York or Harvard or Delhi all because people begged him to come and share his knowledge and experience, have the time and energy to notice the sadness in the eyes of refugee children? As one who once worked closely with him in one of the many institutions he built, the Law and Society Trust, I was simply overwhelmed by his sheer energy, enthusiasm and unimaginable capacity to take in everything from the legal technicalities of constitutional drafting, political theory, political strategising for his party, the TULF, mediating between the PA and the UNP, and the choice of paintings for the ICES auditorium, to the beauty of a Vedic chant, the rhythm of a classical naatyam and yet have the time to refer me to Basil Fernando's latest little booklet of poems (Basil himself would acknowledge his own literary insignificance). 'Why did he bother?' I used to wonder, overburdened as I was with all Neelan's (actually legitimate and reasonable) instructions regarding the LST's Equal Opportunity programme as well as the other 'little' programme ideas Neelan was continually coming up with. Major political actors That immense scope of his interests and involvements was but the backdrop for his even greater contribution to Sri Lankan society. And his assassination in 1999 is one of the many cruel ironies of this crisis we remain trapped in - one of the worst our island society has ever suffered. Neelan was clearly killed because of the significant success of his work, firstly, to encourage a process of negotiation and compromise between the major political actors in the ethnic conflict and, secondly, to design a constitutional-political framework for a comprehensive settlement of the conflict. The Draft Constitution of both the 1999 and 2000 versions are partly due to his individual expertise, creativity, and originality, and more so due to the sheer energy with which he did a kind of quiet 'shuttle diplomacy' between the various key political actors. I think the success of his legal consultancy firm was but the precursor of his later brilliance as a negotiator between various political forces, not just nationally but even internationally, especially among the world powers concerned with the Sri Lankan crisis. And his overall brilliance and ingenuity combined with his dynamism and perseverance was that vital spark our country needed to confront the mediocrity, caprice, hypocrisy and crude political fanaticism that has characterised our civilisation in our early post-colonial modernity. The Draft Constitution yet remains the most comprehensive basis for a future political settlement. It is the kernel of moral decency and political creativity that will defeat the avijjaa that rules even today. And it is precisely that avijjaa, that intellectual poverty, which prompted not only his assassination but also the crude vilification that 'celebrated' his removal from the political firmament. First prominent personality As I noted in these columns in the months following his death: "It was poor Neelan Tiruchelvam who was bestowed the dubious honour, by his Sinhala and Tamil compatriots, of being the first prominent personality to be systematically vilified and ridiculed on his or her death". Usually, on the death of a prominent personality, there are a string of newspaper editorials, commentaries, TV and radio programmes, public lectures and meetings, letters to the editor, and 'Appreciations' in newspapers, all eulogising the dead person. In the case of Neelan Tiruchelvam, however, while the very first few reactions to his death were eulogies, within days, the first denigrations and disparagements appeared. Sadly for our 'civilisation', for several months after his assassination on July 29th, 1999, there were disparaging and denigrating comments in editorials, regular political commentaries, special articles, letter columns both locally and abroad. There was at least one newspaper debate between a denigrator and a defender of Neelan's eminence. The first tirades, inevitably, came from Sinhala sources (I think C. A. Chandraprema was the first) and not from within his own Tamil community. But, as the barrage of vilification by Sinhalas mounted, no doubt, some Tamils may have felt that they should not be left out of this new tradition of bashing the murdered. Kumar Ponnambalam, who was himself assassinated just months later, was the first to begin the attack on behalf of the Tamils. Many others followed. What was interesting was that, unlike previous assassinations of Tamil political actors by the LTTE, in the case of Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam, the LTTE felt it necessary to launch a sustained global propaganda campaign to legitimise its action in killing him. Not even TULF leader Appapillai Amirthalingam, the original founder of the Tamil Eelamist secessionist movement, an early victim of LTTE hegemonism, received as much attention. Bipartisan denigration This bipartisan denigration was a curious counterpoint to the similarly bipartisan eulogising that also emanated from both Tamil and Sinhala sources (and also Muslim and international sources). It was not surprising that the killing of Neelan, the inter-ethnic bridge-builder, further strengthened those inter-ethnic bridges. The Sri Lankans of various ethnic origin who joined hands in praising him were those who had been inspired by his efforts for inter-communal and trans-communal action for justice in our society. Neelan's political activism creatively and boldly bestrode ethnic community politics and, at the same time, his actions were a conjunction of responses to a whole range of social justice issues in which ethnic identity and rights were only one aspect. It is precisely because his political activism was one that addressed ethnic politics in such a dynamic and transcendental manner that his posthumous appreciation and depreciation emanated equally from both sides of the principal ethnic divide. The parallel denigration of Tiruchelvam by the LTTE and its social support base on the one hand, and by the Sinhala ultra-nationalist circles on the other, show a fascinating congruence of behaviour between two socio-political blocs which are otherwise locked in a very real fight to the death (as they see it and act it out). Logic of the denigration The ideological sources of this congruence are interesting. The logic of the denigration on each side is in counter-point to each other: the Sinhala ultra-nationalist bloc vilified Neelan for focussing on the exclusivity of identity and on social (ethnic) difference while the LTTE bloc denigrated (and continues to denigrate) him for attempting to transcend the identity conflict or, rather, for attempting to negotiate the trajectory of identity contests along the continuum of a larger, inclusive form of political association (confederal, regional and global). Neelam Tiruchelvam is one of a very few prominent Sri Lankan social activists who acted both in concert with social group differences (and contests) as well as in transcendence of differences in a larger, inclusive, communal outlook for the whole of this island community. It is perhaps that enmeshing of the Exclusive with the Inclusive that has provoked such furore among those who cannot embrace all dimensions of plurality while engaging with the dynamics of singularity. The irony is that the LTTE which killed him and, at the time, denigrated Neelan's advocacy of pluralist democracy and inclusivist politics, is today being compelled to acknowledge the validity of these ideas amid the current compulsions towards a negotiated, democratic solution to the ethnic conflict. Neelan, in his brilliance, not only foresaw the configuration of a future political settlement, but actually initiated the design of a prototype framework: the Draft Constitution. If he knew how Southern political party rivalries would result in the early betrayal of that effort, Neelan, given his immense determination (sometimes so exhausting to some of us!), would still not have been disheartened. He would have proceeded to engage in negotiation and strategising and, in the design of new mechanisms to deal with the obstacles as they arose. Sadly, while the LTTE is now (shamelessly, but wisely) moving towards a political solution that must, at some point in the future, inevitably draw on the Draft Constitution prototype, the political leaderships in the South are yet indulging in the pleasures of party power contests. a negotiated settlement Thankfully, the People's Alliance, which responded most favourably to Neelan's constitutional initiatives, is yet upholding the significance of the Draft Constitution. But the other principal Sinhala party (Neelan, given his location on the political stage, would not have described it as 'Sinhala') has yet to respond with the same enthusiasm. Neelan sacrificed his life in this endeavour towards a civilised post-colonial recovery. Perhaps, the PA leadership faces the challenge of making further sacrifices (hopefully not their lives) in the intermediate effort to build a bipartisan collaboration that would be the necessary core for a negotiated settlement. And if the JVP has changed its policies in its increasing proximity to governance, there is hope that these compulsions may prompt a new policy outlook that will also see the Peramuna's contribution to a political settlement. Equally important is the need for civil society, which Neelan nurtured with much resources and vigour, to also engage in a collective, collaborative effort to build on the Draft Constitution. Neelan looked to the future and a new Sri Lankan polity that broke through the morass of conflict and oppression. Let not his passing and the passing of other individual leaders emasculate society to such a degree that death and destruction continues to prevail over life and prosperity. Enlightenment simply must defeat avijjaa. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
