|
|
|
  |
| Sunday, 13 March 2005 |
 |
|
 |
Editorial |  |
| News Business Features Security
|
Please forward your comments to the
Editor, Sunday Observer. E-mail: [email protected] Snail mail : Sunday Observer, 35, D.R.Wijewardana Mawatha, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Telephone : 94 11 2429239 / 2331181 Fax : 94 11 2429230 Towards a federal Sri Lanka The Sri Lanka Freedom Party's Convention held Friday has passed a resolution calling for a political solution to the National Question through devolution of power in a united Sri Lanka. The same view has been endorsed by the UNP and majority of political parties both within and outside parliament. The best method of implementation of the resolution would be to draft a federal constitution that would take into consideration the aspirations of all communities. The President addressing the SLFP Women's Convention a few days ago expressed her confidence that 80 percent of the people would support devolution of power based on a federal model. In fact the federal idea is nothing new. During the Oslo round of the peace talks held between the Government and the LTTE under the UNF both parties agreed to explore the possibility of working out a solution based on the federal model. The PA which was in Opposition, then did not object to this agreement or understanding. Tracing the history of the federal concept in modern Sri Lanka one could go as far back as 1926 when late S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike in a speech at a Student Congress meeting in Jaffna said:"... In Ceylon each province should have complete autonomy. There should be one or two assemblies to deal with the special revenue of the island, A thousand and one objections could be raised against the system but when objections are dissipated, I am convinced that some form of Federal Government would be the only solution." (Morning Leader, July 17, 1926) In 1944 the Ceylon Communist Party passed a resolution recognising the right of self-determination of nationalities inhabiting the island including their right to secede, if they ever so desire. More recently the Draft Constitution 2000 presented to parliament and abandoned due to the opposition of the UNP was based on federal principles. It called for a union of regions in a unified Sri Lanka as against the unitary state that exists under the present Constitution. Unfortunately the federal concept has been misinterpreted and a federal phobia has been created in the minds of the people by vested interests that want to perpetuate the present system of injustice. International experience has shown that federal states provide a better solution to ensure democracy and equal rights for all citizens of multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies. Our immediate neighbour India is a fine example of a federal state, which has been in the main successful in dissipating centrifugal forces and preserving the unity of the Indian Union. In this context an immediate necessity is to increase public awareness of the federal principles and various models of federal solutions. It is also necessary to underline that we have to evolve our own model of federalism through discussion and consensus. There is a misconception that federalism automatically gives way to separation. Federation not only does mean devolution of power. It also includes sharing power at the centre. It is in the absence of the latter that devolved authorities tend to break away. The unitary state is not sacrosanct. It has been in existence only for a short period in the long history of our country. Though the state was unified at times throughout history there had been broad devolution of power to provincial kingdoms. The unitary state was a creation of the British colonial masters. The sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state do not wither away under federalism. On the other hand a unitary structure is no guarantor of sovereignty and territorial integrity as has been witnessed in the history of many nations. The peace process that has been laid on track by the Ceasefire Agreement does not envisage the creation of a separate state. The preamble to the Agreement says that the overall objective of the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE is to find a negotiated solution to the ongoing ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka. Moreover the international community has pledged to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. The parameters of the discussion, therefore, would be confined to working out a solution within Sri Lanka. In the globalised world of today no country could live in isolation. It has to take part in the international division of labour. Further, both regional and world powers would not tolerate a hostile Thamil Elaam in the Indian Ocean. Federalism would not only facilitate a solution to the National Question. It would also enhance democracy by empowering the periphery, by giving more room for local initiative and by bringing government closer to the people. It is a better way to eliminate the large disparities in development between the centre and the periphery. While federalism could provide the best means of finding a viable solution to the National Question a prolongation of the conflict and our inability to find a peaceful solution runs the risk of Sri Lanka being isolated within the international community of nations. Renewal of hostilities would not only be a calamity for our people but could also endanger our sovereignty. |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security | Produced by Lake House |
