15 July, 2020

Blog

Would Mandela Be Killed In Sri Lanka?

By Dinesh D. Dodamgoda

Dinesh Dodamgoda

Dinesh Dodamgoda

“We may never forget, but we must forgive”

The above words came from former President of South Africa Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, when he was encouraging Miriam Makeba, a South African singer nicknamed Mama Africa, to return to South Africa from exile.[1]

When rebuilding South Africa, ‘forgiveness’ was the ethos of Nelson Mandela. In Long Walk to Freedom, he wrote, “To make peace with an enemy, one must work with that enemy and that enemy becomes your partner”.[2]

The principle of forgiveness became the foundation of the South African reconciliation process. In order to initiate the reconciliation process, the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was establish as a part of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act passed in 1995. The Act was passed after debated the bill in the parliament for 200 hours.

NelsonThe Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act was based on the principle that ‘reconciliation depends on forgiveness and that forgiveness can only take place if gross violations of human rights are fully disclosed’, offered amnesty to the perpetrators of ‘acts associated with a ‘political objective’.[3] Therefore, the TRC which helped in healing the wounded South African society had no power of prosecution, or any judicial function. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, later appointed to Chair the TRC, hoped that the TRC would open wounds in order to clean them. As Professor Andre du Toid, an Emeritus Professor in Politics at the University of Cape Town, observed, ‘The South African Commission will be unlike the Nuremburg trials in that it will be concerned with truth not justice.’[4]

No TRC for SL!

An inquiry is being demanded by the Global Tamil Forum (GTF) led Tamil diaspora and human rights groups in urging the United Nations (UN) to investigate alleged incidents of gross human rights violations during the ‘final phase’ of the War against the LTTE in Sri Lanka. Although a mechanism has not been finalised yet, the groups that demand an inquiry are not ready to accept a mechanism similar to the South African TRC model.

The GTF wants perpetrators to be punished. Commenting on former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s decision to hold snap elections in January 2015, Suren Surendiran, the GTF Spokesperson said; “It is Rajapaksa, as the head of state and commander in chief of the military, who stands accused of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Some people even accuse him of committing genocidal crimes against the Tamil community.  As head of state he has immunity against international law. The day he is beaten in an election and is not head of state. Just has what happened to Charles Taylor or Milosevic who committed genocidal crimes and breached international law, Rajapaksa will be taken by the International Criminal Court and will be charged with committing war crimes.”[5]

Human rights groups also take a similar stance. For example, Amnesty International Chief Executive in India G. Ananthapadmanabhan said in an interview; “There should be punishment based on the findings of the (UN) investigation. Officially, Amnesty is not welcome to Sri Lanka at this time … but we have our own ways to find out what is going on there.”[6]

Therefore, it is evident that the GTF and human rights groups demand a mechanism based on a ‘punitive justice model’ which aims at ‘justice’ by punishing convicts after a trial. It is surprising to note that even the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) does not consider the South African TRC as an appropriate model for Sri Lanka. As quoted by the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) Parliamentarian Mr. M. A. Sumanthiran, the reason for inappropriateness according to the Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera is that ‘amnesty for disclosure will not work in SL, and that perpetrators will be prosecuted, since confession and forgiveness is not part of the SL culture.’[7]

In addition, two different approaches are proposed in the draft of the National Policy on Reconciliation[8] which was prepared by Professor Rajiva Wijesinha, Mr. Eran Wickramaratne, Mr. M.A. Sumanthiran, Mr. Javid Yusuf and Mr. Jeevan Thiagarajah in prosecuting perpetrators of alleged war-crimes. The said policy document noted under the sub section Justice and Truth and Reconciliation that,

‘It is vital that the Government recognises that many of those who engaged in acts of terrorism did so under compulsion, and whilst particular deeds may warrant investigation and judicial action, perpetrators should be treated with dignity and provided with an opportunity to reintegrate into society. Conversely, the Government must fulfil its responsibility to investigate security forces for alleged excesses that occurred during the war.’

Accordingly, the policy suggests, ‘The following key responses must be undertaken in implementing this strategy: (A) Investigate, prosecute and punish wrongdoers including security forces implicated in deliberately targeted death or injury of civilians; (B) Ensure proper investigation into disappearance, including those that took place after surrender to the armed forces, and ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice.’

Therefore, the approach in the final draft of National Policy on Reconciliation proposes a ‘restorative justice’ model to the LTTE fighters and a ‘punitive justice’ model to the government forces, setting up two moral status for the LTTE and the government forces.

Concerns raised against a TRC

As such, at least five points were raised by the GTF, Amnesty International, the GOSL and the authors of the draft of the National Policy on Reconciliation in arguing the case against Sri Lanka in adopting a mechanism similar to the South African TRC model. Accordingly,

  1. An inquiry should be based on the principle of punishment but not forgiveness
  2. An inquiry should set up two moral status for the LTTE and the government forces
  3. An inquiry should consider only the final phase of the War against the LTTE
  4. An inquiry should be based on a trial, a conviction and punishment
  5. An inquiry is to punish perpetrators as confession and forgiveness is not part of the Sri Lankan culture

The Experience in SA

When evaluating arguments raised against Sri Lanka in adopting a TRC style mechanism, it is worth inquiring the South African experience with regard to the five points noted above.

  1. An inquiry should be based on the principle of punishment but not forgiveness

There is no need to emphasise that the South African mechanism was based on the principle of forgiveness but not the principle of punishment. The TRC in SA had no power of prosecution, or any judicial function. However, it could summon witnesses and had search powers and access to all documents. According to the process that was adopted by the TRC, a perpetrator could apply for seeking amnesty and after a detailed confession about crimes he/she committed in achieving political objectives, his/her name would be published in the Government Gazette with acts for which the amnesty apply. It was a public hearing, yet the Committee could decide on a private hearing.

  1. An inquiry should set up two moral status for the LTTE and the government forces

Only a single moral status was set up in the South African context. The National Party (NP) negotiator, a member of the last white cabinet, Danie Schutte cautioned that ‘any instance on separate moral status for apartheid soldiers and guerrillas of the African National Congress’ (ANC’s) armed wing could undermine reconciliation.[9] A South African reporter noted that the Commission should focus not just on the apartheid regime but also on crimes committed by the liberation movement such as the ANC atrocities in Angolan detention camps.[10]

  1. An inquiry should consider only the final phase of the War against the LTTE

The South African Commission had a mandate to cover crimes committed with a political objectives from 1 March 1960 to May 1994. This was to cover almost all the possible politically motivated gross human rights violations during the apartheid in SA. However, only the final phase of the War against the LTTE is to be considered in the Sri Lankan case and it would be the period from 1 January 2009 to May 2009.

  1. An inquiry should be based on a trial, a conviction and punishment

Human Rights organisations are the main propagators of the above argument. Even in the South African context, Amnesty International itself had suggested that pardon be granted only after trial and conviction.[11] However, arguing against human rights organisations, Professor Kader Asmal, a Professor of human rights at the University of the Western Cape and a politician, stated in a speech prepared for the TRC in SA that, ‘The Nuremburg approach would probably enjoy the support of most human rights organisations’ but this would not be conducive to reconciliation ‘and could be considered as a witch hunt’.[12]

  1. An inquiry is to punish perpetrators as confession and forgiveness is not part of the Sri Lankan culture

Even in the South African context, some people argued that the culture and the moral code of the South African society is to punish perpetrators. For example, the very first interviewee, a Professor, who applied to become a TRC Commissioner said in the interview that he believed in retribution as part of the process, because ‘it is part and parcel of our moral code, our legal system and our theological belief, and I feel that the public embarrassment that would come with revelation to the Commission is a form of punishment.’[13] Even the families of Steve Biko also disagreed with the TRC and tested the Legality of the Commission in the Constitutional Court, saying they want ‘justice’. Yet, the confessed perpetrators who admitted to killing Biko were not prosecuted.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu believed that reconciliation is not cheap and was based ultimately on forgiveness and repentance, which depend on confession.[14] Archbishop Tutu favoured as broad a process of forgiveness as possible, provided those who perpetrated murders or torture could prove they acted politically.[15] Therefore, the SA government refused the argument raised against the TRC on the basis of cultural and moral codes of the society and went ahead with the TRC mechanism.

TRC for SL?

As we noted above, there were concerns even in the South African context against the TRC. However, the President Mandela and the Archbishop Tutu had the courage and the political will to go beyond human limitations to uphold the principle of forgiveness. Eventually, the TRC became a successful mechanism in encompassing a new vision for South Africa, the country that had torn apart by the wrongs of apartheid. Therefore, the concerns raised against the idea of adopting a TRC mechanism in Sri Lanka can be challenged.

The argument that raised against the TRC by the Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera on the basis of the idea that confession and forgiveness is not part of the Sri Lankan culture is incorrect. In fact, the Sinhalese and the Tamils have a culture of forgiveness. For example, the foundation of their traditional New Year Festival (Sinhalese and Tamil/Hindu New Year) which they celebrate together on the same day is about having a fresh start and forgiving others. According to Buddhism, the religion of the majority Sinhalese, “Hatred is, indeed, never appeased by hatred in this world. It is appeased only by loving-kindness. This is an ancient law”. I would like to state that when playing a major role in re-admitting Japan to the world community at the San Francisco Conference, the representative of SL, former President J.R.Jayawardene then as the Finance Minister stood by this noble Buddhist principle. Furthermore, for the Tamils, even the Holi festival is also about forgiveness by meeting and making up with ruptured relationships. Therefore, it is incorrect to argue that ‘the idea that confession and forgiveness is not part of the Sri Lankan culture’.

As stated by Professor Kader Asmal, a Professor of human rights at the University of the Western Cape and a politician, arguing against human rights organisations, the Nuremburg approach proposed by human rights organisations would not be conducive to reconciliation and should be considered as a witch hunt even in the Sri Lankan context. It is important to note that there is at least a 42% of population that voted for former President Mr. Rajapaksa in the recently concluded election represents the ideology of Sinhala-Buddhist Nationalism. In numbers, that counts to 4.7 million. What would they do if a domestic inquiry was initiated and punished ‘their war heroes’? Furthermore, would not it further polarise the society that would generate counterproductive effects in terms of reconciliation?

Furthermore, the proposal to set up two moral status for the LTTE and the government forces in the proposed inquiry is also incorrect. Only a single moral status should be set up as it was in the South African context and any discrimination in applying two moral status could undermine reconciliation.

Moreover, if we want to adopt the principle in SA, an inquiry should consider not only the final phase of the War against the LTTE and at least the period from 1975 (the year Mayor of Jaffna Alfred Duraiappah was assassinated) to May 2010 should be considered. This would assist in finding probably the absolute truth that the seekers want.

Attempts were there

In fact, there were attempts to implement a TRC style model or at least to use its principles in Sri Lanka. For example, addressing the Global Tamil Federation’s 3rd Anniversary Conference in 2013 held at the British Parliament in London, the Tamil national Alliance Parliamentarian Mr. M. A. Sumanthiran, for example, said; “It is said that Truth is the first casualty of war. I want to say today that Truth is also the first step in reconciliation. It is in recognition of this principle that after the struggle to end Apartheid in South Africa, the process that united the country was called the “Truth and Reconciliation Commission”.[16]

Furthermore, giving an interview to a newspaper, the GTF Spokesperson Suren Surendiran in 2013 expressed his hopes in implementing a South African government mediated accountability process in Sri Lanka[17] and the proposed basis for the accountability process was the South African TRC experience.

Therefore, people who argue against the applicability of the South African TRC principles in Sri Lanka now want to achieve nothing, but to kill President Mandela in Sri Lanka by destroying the trust he placed on universally accepted principle of forgiveness.

War-Crimes Vs Reconciliation

In my opinion, however, the key issue in post-war Sri Lanka is “Reconciliation”, because without building a true, peaceful relationship between Sinhalese, Tamils, and Muslims etc., no other post-war issue will be satisfactorily addressed. Proposing the issue of ‘Reconciliation’ with the issue of ‘Accountability’ is a mistake when evaluating it against the post-war context in Sri Lanka.

The reason is that such an approach generates counterproductive effects on initiating a process of sustainable reconciliation, because bringing the war-crime accountability issue forward ignites the flare of the Sinhalese anger over international actors, human rights groups and the Tamil diaspora as the majority of Sinhalese hail the military victory over LTTE and see contributors to the victory as ‘heroes’.

However, if the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) wants to initiate a domestic inquiry in SL as proposed by the USA this time, a mechanism similar to the South African TRC should be adopted and ‘forgiveness’ should be used as the principle of the process. If not, President Mandela would be killed in Sri Lanka.

Reference

[1]Miriam Makeba, interviewed on the South Bank Show, ITV London, 9, April 1995.

[2]Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom, Little, Brown and Co, 1994, p. 604.

[3]Brian Frost, Struggle to Forgive, London, Harper Collins, 1998, p. 140.

[4] Professor Andre du Toit, (ed) Alex Boraine, Janet Lavy, The Healing of the Nation? Justice in Transition 1995, p. 98

 [5] [http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=12937]

[6][https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/amnesty-wants-u-n-probe-into-sri-lanka-war-crimes/]

[7] https://www.ceylontoday.lk/51-95570-news-detail-sumanthiran-admits-backdoor-meeting-in-london.html

[8]http://reconciliationandrightssrilanka.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/national-policy-on-reconciliation-working-document-draft-one/

[9] South African Times, 5 July 1995, p. 1

[10] Phillip van Niekerk, The Observer, 24 December 1995, p. 6

[11] South African Times, 3 August 1994, p. 2

[12] Ibid. 2 November 1994

[13] Professor Hendrik van der Merwe, The Argus, 13 November 1995

[14] See, Brian Frost, Struggle to Forgive, London, Harper Collins, 1998, p. 144

[15] Ibid. pp. 144-145

[16] [http://www.eyesrilanka.com/2013/03/01/1002/]

[17] [http://www.globaltamilforum.org/media/news/we-remain-hopeful-gtf.aspx]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 3
    2

    GTF is no spokes person for the Tamils in Sri Lanka. Please do not compare South Africa with Sri Lanka. Both communities suffered in different ways . In South Africa the majority black race was enslaved , massacred and suppressed in their own country by the occupied minority English race whereas in Sri Lanka the minority race was subjugated and massacred , time and time again by the majority race. This article needs no more comment.

    • 2
      0

      Sellam,

      The Tamils decided to use gross violence to solve problems by utilising terrorism. They killed Sinhalese and Muslims. The Tamils were not ready to solve the problem by negotiations, they used negotiations as a tactic when they were weak. Neither the Tamil leaders / groups who now criticise the use of violence against tamils by the Sinhalese nor human rights groups then stood against the Tamils that used violence against Sinhala and Muslim civilians. The HR groups then thought the Tamil terrorists were the freedom fighters. So, why are the HR groups and the Tamil groups crying now? The Tamils thought they could fight with the Sinhalese. The Sinhalese after suffering from Tamil terrorism for more than two decades answered the Tamil terrorist using the language the Tamil terrorists understood. The Tamils wanted things in this way. :-)

  • 3
    3

    Dinesh, you argue a good point. However,

    to answer your question in the first place a Sri Lankan will never be a Mandela – period. Our charachter is different. Our culture is different. True forgiveness is a Christian ethos and not found anywhere in the East. Our nature, history, culture and religions including Buddhism has no tract on forgiveness. True, Buddha is supposed to have spoken of metta and karuna and hatred cosuming the hater etc. however history has proven none of these truly influenced the thinking of any Sri Lankans and definitely not the leaders. All leaders are hell bent on vengeance only. And all people back such demands. So basically we do not have a Mandela to kill. So your question is redundant.

    And the people whether Tamils, Sinhalese or Muslims or any other in Sri Lanka have no time for restorative justice. The people are demanding blood, an eye for an eye and until then no reconciliation is possible also, sadly.

  • 3
    5

    RE: Would Mandela Be Killed In Sri Lanka?

    “The above words came from former President of South Africa Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, when he was encouraging Miriam Makeba, a South….. “

    “The principle of forgiveness became the foundation of the South African reconciliation process. In order to initiate the reconciliation process, the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was establish as a part of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act passed in 1995. The Act was passed after debated the bill in the parliament for 200 hours.”

    Ask Also,
    Would Obama Be Killed In Sri Lanka? Yes, to both,

    Why? The Para-Sinhala Buddhists have not matured yet.

    Americans were not mature in 1967, and killed Martin Luther king.

    However, they Elected Obama in 2008, after maturing.

    So, if the para-Sinhala Buddhists mature, just like the white Americans,there will be progress.

    Until then Para-Sinhal Buddhist Maras, like MaRa Mahinda Rajapaksa, will lurk in the background to kill.

    Listen to Jaya Mangala Gatha…in Pali

  • 1
    4

    Has Dinesh forgotten that none of the white flag victims were extended forgiveness even though international norm dictates pardon. There are thousands of Tamils without being forgiven, languishing in Sri Lankan prisons without charges brought against them.Does he think President’s son should be pardoned for murdering rugger-rite after torture and burning him a alive? His article is one sided.

  • 3
    3

    It is the right of the victim to demand justice from the powers that be. That right cannot be compromised. However the victim may be inclined to be merciful and forego any punitive punishment in the interest of future relationship and benefits including adequate compensation.

    In terms of the crime committed there is the individual responsible who carried out the crime. He has to take primary responsibility even if he did so under command as he has every right to disobey such a command if it is against his conscience. Secondly the chain of command and finally the commander in chief is responsible for any command he may have issued against the laws of natural justice.

    The truth if established must lead to justice unless the victim decides to grant clemency on his or her own volition.

  • 4
    0

    Mr. Dodamgoda, an impressive analysis. We can now understand that Amnesty International plays a dirty ‘game’ all over the world. They want to punish people, because they act with hatred in their hearts.
    The GTF is no different. They all want to kill the great leader Mandela again.

  • 1
    1

    I believe the TRC in South Africa was set-up with the best of intentions to promote integration of that society. However, several decades after that act, South Africa experiences some of the worst racial violence and poverty in all of Africa, despite its vast wealth.

    That fact to me shows that how ever good the intentions, REAL healing of racial wounds takes much more concerted effort, including the economic uplifting of the downtrodden ethnicity.

    Using 2 different standards in judging the “good” vs. the ‘bad’ combatants (SLA and LTTE), will only perpetuate the grievances of one ethnicity or the other. It will NOT solve our problems.

  • 6
    0

    TOo much and unwarranted attention is paid to the antics of the fringe extremist groups among the Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka. Their nice was mistaken to be the voice of the people throughout and brounght us where we are, through much violence, destruction, blood shed and deaths.

    The latest antic from the Tamil side is the march led by sivajilingam and Ananthi. Much is being made about it, although from the TV clips I have seen not more than 10-20 people are following them. Sivajilingam and Ananthi are the two empty heads with big mouths in Tamil politics. Weerawansa and Gammanpila are their equivalents on the Sinhala side.

    Ignore these fringe elements and those of their ilk and do what is ‘Right’ and appears to be ‘Right’ to the Tamils and the other peoples. Do not make thesee fringe groups the excuse for the unwillingness to act, because of mal-intent or political expediency.

    Dr.Rajasingham Narendran

  • 1
    1

    Well, well, well. How can one find fault with the draft proposals for ‘National Policy on Reconciliation’ when it proposes that ‘perpetrators should be treated with dignity and provided with an opportunity to reintegrate into society.’. In other words, a warm bath and a wank.

    Apropos what is attributed to Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera…that ‘amnesty for disclosure will not work in SL, and that perpetrators will be prosecuted, since confession and forgiveness is not part of the SL culture.’ please read ‘confession and forgiveness is not part of the SL culture.’ as ‘denial and revenge is still part of the Sri Lankan culture’.

    Only time will tell if, as a nation, we can exorcise that mindset.

  • 5
    2

    The Tamil [Edited out] has consistently taken up positions the [Edited out] cannot conceivably realize. Its is a bizarre phenomenon.

    One wonders if the Tamil [Edited out] peer-review their grievances before bringing them out to light. Here are a few.

    – %60 people in the East are not Tamil and do not wish any association either. That did not stop the donkey from spilling blood for 3 decades wanting a homeland there!
    – There are more Tamils living outside of the North East. That did stop the stupid donkey from running amok demanding “Tamil linguistic state” in the NE.
    – The Sinhala people are responsible for 80% of country GDP. That did not stop the stupid donkey demanding parity with the Sinhala people.
    – Until 1972 low-caste Tamils were treated in absolute apartheid conditions by Tamils themselves including forbidding entering Hindu Temples and schools burnt. That did not stop the stupid moron from continuously whine about “Sinhala Discrimination”.
    – The Tamils were shipped to North & East after 1700. That did not stop the stupid donkey from pretending to be like a native tribe facing “genocide”.

    In the 65 year span the Tamil [Edited out] has consistently taken positions that can be only described as “juvenile”. And it continues.

  • 2
    0

    This is a great article which consist meaningful inside to start at a point. In my opinion forgiveness is the best option in considering both sides since Sri Lanka is emotional and sensitive with changing political and forgiveness is our part of culture and part of region. in long term what we wanted to achieve is that the peace in all…

  • 4
    0

    Excellent article, but can someone define ‘reconcilliation’? The word is used so much .

  • 2
    0

    This is a good starting point to answer what is reconcilliation:

    http://www.un.org/en/peacebuilding/pbso/pdf/Reconciliation-After-Violent-Conflict-A-Handbook-Full-English-PDF.pdf

    Search for “Reconciliation-After-Violent-Conflict-A-Handbook-Full-English-PDF.pdf” published by the UN.

    Excerpt

    “2.1 What is Reconciliation?
    2.1.1 Ideally

    Ideally reconciliation prevents, once and for all, the use of the past as the seed of renewed conflict.

    It consolidates peace, breaks the cycle of violence and strengthens newly established or reintroduced democratic institutions. “

  • 1
    2

    The difference between South Africa and Sri Lanka is that the South African TRC took place in an environment that non-recurrence was guaranteed. It took place post-Apartheid when there was a guarantee within SA and from the IC that there will never be a return to Apartheid. I have no problem with a restorative justice process that does not seek retribution, but that process obviously has to come with 100% guarantees of non recurrence. I think most Tamils agree with this. Even Tamilnet published an editorial right after the war ended that said that there is no need for MR to “sit in an electric chair” as there was already enough blood spilled on the island. I think the GTF is following the lead of the UNHRC which said that there should be no amnesty for leaders guilty of war crimes. The UN is trying to preserve its own credibility. African nations have argued for a long time that only Africans are hauled in front of UN justice processes.
    &nbdp;
    The crux of the matter is that there can be no guarantee of non recurrence as long as Sinhalese soldiers bear arms in the NE, and Tamils are forbidden from doing so. This is not the natural state of human existence, and I’m sure Mr.Dodamgoda will agree with me that Tamils are in fact human beings. Whatever the final solution to the dispute is, it has to include a full, complete and permanent eviction of every single Sinhalese soldier from the NE, in order to guarantee non-recurrence.

    • 2
      1

      Parriot
      “Whatever the final solution to the dispute is, it has to include a full, complete and permanent eviction of every single Sinhalese soldier from the NE”

      This proposal still leaves more 50% of Tamils in the hands of brutal Sinhala armed foces and genocidal Sinhaĺese.

      Therefore what is more significant is any final solution should include a full, complete and permanent movement of ALL TAMIL SPEAKING PEOPLE IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR RELIGION OR DATE OF ARRIVAL from south into the NE.

      Soma

  • 3
    0

    Accountability is the very antithesis of reconciliation and reconciliation is the very antithesis of Ealam project.

    Soma

    • 2
      1

      somass kantha

      “Accountability is the very antithesis of reconciliation and reconciliation is the very antithesis of Ealam project.”

      Accountability – the fact or condition of being accountable; responsibility.

      Punishment – the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence.

      Reconciliation – the action of making one view or belief compatible with another.

      Somass Kantha

      Now you work it out for yourself what Accountability, Punishment and Reconciliation work.

      Further definition to help you with reconciliation of Soma with Somass Kantha:

      Smart-A**e – a person who is irritating because they behave as if they know everything.

      Clever Dick – a person who is irritatingly and ostentatiously knowledgeable or intelligent.

      • 0
        0

        What do you call a person itching to be pricked by a dick?

        Soma

  • 2
    2

    “I’m sure Mr.Dodamgoda will agree with me that Tamils are in fact human beings”
    Who said Tamils are human beings? they are asuras, soothiras, gorillas and Terrists. If they are humans the countries would not have allowed Mullivaaikaal. They would have done some thing in 1983 itself.

  • 1
    0

    first of all make languages equal and equal and fair use by constitutional law and then make both languages mandatory at schools at least to a basic the and as an option.

  • 0
    2

    The call for forgiveness must come from the Tamils not imposed by the Sinalese-public or ‘political analysts’

    The call should be such that the international investigation is conducted not to punish but to reveal the truth and then followed by a magnanimous announcement that should the perpetrators accept their role they are then forgiven.

    ordering the Tamils to forgive is the ultimate insult!

  • 3
    0

    Your argument is a good start. But you are indirectly comparing Ranil, MY3, Mangala and co to Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu. SA TRC model was a successful model there is no doubt. In Srilanka, we are not lacking for ideas but lacking for courage and efforts and implementation.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.