1977 இல் நடந்த வாக்கெடுப்புக்கு பதில் என்ன?
1985 திம்புக்கோரிக்கைகளுக்கு பதில் என்ன?
Lanka rejects Sudan-type referendum, highlights disparity in situations
February 14, 2011, 9:47 pm
Responding to ongoing efforts by overseas LTTE activists to have a referendum in Sri Lanka like the recent one in Sudan, the Sri Lankan government says those supporting the move have conveniently ignored the vast difference in the two situations.
Former Secretary General of the SCOPP (Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha told The Island that the move to demand a referendum in Sri Lanka revealed total ignorance of both history and political principles. He said: "In Sudan you had a situation, in which not only did the writ of the government not run in some areas, but also the administration was not able to supply basic services to people in those areas."
The Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) led by one-time LTTE legal chief V. Rudrakumaran and some pro-LTTE NGOs want the UN to pressure Sri Lanka to agree to a referendum.
MP Wijesinha said that the government, throughout the conflict, had provided services in all provinces, health and education for instance, including in the limited areas controlled by terrorists. "Successive government the whole time paid the salaries of and issued instructions to public servants in those areas, and they communicated with and travelled regularly to meetings in the rest of the country. Significantly, though such public servants were under tremendous pressure, they continued to work loyally, and the Government Agents affected for instance continue in service with appropriate promotions."
The MP went on to say: "Sadly this was not well known outside Sri Lanka, and a former French Ambassador for instance, who was one of the most positive European envoys in the period when many were under terrorist influence, told us he had been surprised to find how much we continued to do for people in the areas under terrorist control. The impression sought to have been created in Paris was quite otherwise. Significantly a senior member of the UN, which had also been trying to control assistance programmes, but soon learned that government should take decisions albeit happy to receive advice and support, told me that many people coming to Sri Lanka were in error, thinking that we were a country like Sudan, but they had soon learnt the truth."
"I cannot comment on whether particular attitudes contributed to making the situation in Sudan worse, but I am glad we were able to clarify things here and also get rid of the terrorism that was preventing us from serving all our people well. Naturally those who still espouse separatism will continue to try to disrupt the services we provide, and will not care about making people suffer as they pursue their own ends. I hope they will not be encouraged."
1985 திம்புக்கோரிக்கைகளுக்கு பதில் என்ன?
Lanka rejects Sudan-type referendum, highlights disparity in situations
February 14, 2011, 9:47 pm
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Responding to ongoing efforts by overseas LTTE activists to have a referendum in Sri Lanka like the recent one in Sudan, the Sri Lankan government says those supporting the move have conveniently ignored the vast difference in the two situations.Former Secretary General of the SCOPP (Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha told The Island that the move to demand a referendum in Sri Lanka revealed total ignorance of both history and political principles. He said: "In Sudan you had a situation, in which not only did the writ of the government not run in some areas, but also the administration was not able to supply basic services to people in those areas."
The Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) led by one-time LTTE legal chief V. Rudrakumaran and some pro-LTTE NGOs want the UN to pressure Sri Lanka to agree to a referendum.
MP Wijesinha said that the government, throughout the conflict, had provided services in all provinces, health and education for instance, including in the limited areas controlled by terrorists. "Successive government the whole time paid the salaries of and issued instructions to public servants in those areas, and they communicated with and travelled regularly to meetings in the rest of the country. Significantly, though such public servants were under tremendous pressure, they continued to work loyally, and the Government Agents affected for instance continue in service with appropriate promotions."
The MP went on to say: "Sadly this was not well known outside Sri Lanka, and a former French Ambassador for instance, who was one of the most positive European envoys in the period when many were under terrorist influence, told us he had been surprised to find how much we continued to do for people in the areas under terrorist control. The impression sought to have been created in Paris was quite otherwise. Significantly a senior member of the UN, which had also been trying to control assistance programmes, but soon learned that government should take decisions albeit happy to receive advice and support, told me that many people coming to Sri Lanka were in error, thinking that we were a country like Sudan, but they had soon learnt the truth."
"I cannot comment on whether particular attitudes contributed to making the situation in Sudan worse, but I am glad we were able to clarify things here and also get rid of the terrorism that was preventing us from serving all our people well. Naturally those who still espouse separatism will continue to try to disrupt the services we provide, and will not care about making people suffer as they pursue their own ends. I hope they will not be encouraged."
