By Michael . R. Joachim –

“The idea that minorities enjoy equal rights primarily when they feel they are administered by the same, non-discriminatory administrative system is a core tenet of human rights law and public administration. Evidence suggests that equal treatment, trust, and effective inclusion are often achieved when administration is transparent, unbiased, and inclusive of minority views, while separate or unequal administration often leads to marginalization”.

At a recent event organized by the Plantation Rural Education Development Organization (PREDO), plantation workers who participated in the 2024 Malaiyaha 200th Anniversary Walk were felicitated. The gathering also sought to renew pressure on the Government to implement the demands submitted during that historic march.

As speeches concluded, a remark by Mr. Ganesan, an ordinary worker from Dikoya Estate, stunned the audience.

“We must continue to pressure the Government to implement the Malaiyagam 200 demands,” he said. “But we cannot win these demands until Anura Kumara Dissanayake becomes the President of the Malaiyagam people.”

His words raised an immediate question: Is not Anura Kumara Dissanayake already the President of all Sri Lankans? If so, who governs the plantation communities?

Ganesan’s answer was stark and revealing.

“Even when someone dies in the estate, we must inform the Manager through the Talaiwar.(the Estate Leader ) It is the Manager who decides where the burial will take place. If we need electricity, we must obtain a letter from the Manager. Even when the President ordered a wage increase, some estate managements raised plucking targets to cancel out the benefit. Inside the estates, national laws and policies are often made meaningless. The truth is, the “Anura Kumara Dissanayake “ is not our President.”

This perception is not unique to Ganesan. It reflects a broader and deeply felt reality among Malaiyagam Tamil communities: within plantation boundaries, the machinery of government appears to weaken, distort, or disappear altogether. What operates instead is an entrenched administrative structure dominated by estate management.

A “System Within a System”

Across Sri Lanka, citizens are governed by a common administrative and legal framework. Yet within plantations, that framework is frequently altered or overridden.

Historically, plantation communities had access to common resources—grazing lands, small-scale dairy farming, and vegetable cultivation. These enabled families to supplement meagre wages with dignified self-employment. Today, such opportunities have largely vanished. Workers are often prohibited from cultivating even unused land, despite national calls to boost local food production.

The contradiction is striking: while the State encourages citizens to contribute to national productivity, plantation residents are denied the means to do so. The authority to decide lies not with public institutions, but with estate management.

Education: Rights Denied

The Government has repeatedly emphasized universal access to quality early childhood education. Harini Amarasuriya, as Prime Minister and Minister of Education, has affirmed the commitment to standardize and expand pre-school education under national policy.

Yet in many estates, this policy is not implemented.

There are documented instances where estate management has blocked the establishment of pre-schools, insisting that only company-run child development centres be used. Parents who have appealed to the police and even the Human Rights Commission have found little recourse. In effect, national education policy stops at the boundary of the estate.

As Ganesan put it, “We are helpless. We are waiting for “Anura Kumar Dissanayake “ to become our President.”

Legacy of an Unresolved System

The roots of this anomaly lie in history. Plantation estates, once controlled by colonial companies, were governed under separate administrative systems. While nationalization and later privatization changed ownership structures, they did not fully integrate plantation communities into the national administrative framework.

The agreements of the early 1990s transferred estate lands and management to private companies. However, it remains unclear whether governance over people’s rights was also implicitly transferred.

Institutions such as the Plantation Human Development Trust (PHDT) and later the “Plantation Authority”  were established as interim mechanisms to provide welfare services. Decades later, these “temporary” arrangements persist, with little progress toward full integration.

How long must plantation communities live under these interim systems?

A Crisis of Accountability

A recent example illustrates the systemic confusion. Appeals were made to the President, the Prime Minister, and the Ministry of Education regarding the denial of pre-school education in estates. Instead of being addressed by the relevant national authorities, the matter was redirected to plantation-specific Ministries ,the PHDT  and estate management.

What does this signify?

If education is a national responsibility, accountability must lie with national institutions. When those institutions defer responsibility, it reinforces the perception that plantation communities fall outside the State’s direct governance.

Meanwhile, some pre-schools remain closed for years, denying children their fundamental right to education—an injustice with long-term consequences for an already marginalized community.

Not Individuals, but Structures

It must be acknowledged that many estate managers act with compassion and fairness. However, the issue is not about individuals—it is about structures.

A system cannot depend on goodwill. It must be grounded in consistent policies, enforceable rights, and accountable governance.

The plantation system today functions as a “system within a system,” where parallel authority often overrides national law. This is not merely an administrative anomaly—it is a democratic deficit.

The Need for Structural Change

Recent developments offer some hope. The recognition of the community as “Malaiyagam people” has strengthened identity and belonging. Government intervention in wage determination marks a departure from past practice.

But these changes, while welcome, are insufficient.

True transformation requires structural reform:

* Converting plantation settlements into recognized villages

* Bringing residents directly under government administration

* Ensuring that national laws, rights, and services apply equally within estates

Without such reforms, plantation communities will continue to feel excluded from the national fabric.

A Call for Inclusion

The demand that “Anura Kumara Dissanayake” must become our President” is not a literal political statement. It is a powerful expression of exclusion.

It is a call for a system where plantation communities:

* Experience the State as present and accountable

* Enjoy the same rights as all other citizens

* Are governed under the same laws and institutions

In essence, it is a demand for equality.

Until that transformation occurs, the question will persist—not as rhetoric, but as lived reality:

When will the President of Sri Lanka truly become the President of the Malaiyagam people?

*Michael Joachim, Executive Director – Plantation Rural Education Development Organization (PREDO)