by Oretta Bandettini di Poggio, Secrétaire générale, the International League for the Rights and Liberation of Peoples under Agenda Item on the right of  peoples to self-determination and its application to peoples under colonial or alien domination or foreign, occupation - 22 March 2001

On December 24th last the so-called terrorist rebels, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) announced a month long unilateral cease-fire as a good will gesture to facilitate and promote initiatives towards a peace process. While declaring the cease-fire the LTTE expressed the hope that this gesture would be reciprocated by the Sri Lanka government and that the economic blockade would be lifted. The offer was categorically rejected by the government of Sri Lanka.

Prior to this declaration of unilateral truce, meetings had been held in October/November 2000 between the Norwegian envoy, Mr Eric Solheim, and both the president of Sri Lanka and the LTTE leader with a view to discuss confidence building measures to be mutually reciprocated by the parties in conflict. Besides the LTTE also issued reiterated calls for the de-escalation of the armed conflict meaning by that the cessation of armed hostilities, the removal of military aggression and occupation, the withdrawal of the economic embargo and the creation of condition of normalcy which is an essential prerequisite to resume political negotiations. Furthermore and most importantly the cease-fire has already been extended twice, next dead-line being March 24th without any effect. All these appeals and offers have been rejected point-blank.

The Sri Lanka government has declared it considers calls for de-escalation as a move by LTTE to prepare for war and has taken advantage of the truce to increase its military offensive, to recruit and train more than 10.000 soldiers and to further allocate 1 billion dollars to the war budget.(7.2% of GDP)

Army representatives have gone as far as saying, and I quote : …There will be no negotiations with the Tamil Tigers. They will be completely wiped out". On top of that, warnings have been issued by the army that severe actions would be taken against those who organise or take part in hunger-strikes, peace marches or any form of protest urging the Sri Lanka government to begin negotiation with the Liberation Tigers. 

Rev. Swampillai, Catholic Bishop of the Trincomalee-Batticaloa diocese commented the army's proclamation by declaring "It is a dangerous development that people who say the war should be stopped and call for peace in Sri Lanka should be considered offenders by the army". Nevertheless massive manifestations have been held. On January 17th, in Jaffna, security forces refused to allow a peace demonstration by university and high school students, residents and members of civil organisations. Thousands of people were turned away at check points, roads were blocked by barbed wire and entrance to the university grounds was refused to anyone not belonging to the staff. Nine students were arrested, identity cards and bicycles were confiscated. Reporters were not permitted into the university either.

Let us further add that all Tamil parties, even those which have been co-operating with successive Sinhala governments, have taken a positive stand as regards the cease-fire. Several joint delegations have recently met with ambassadors and representatives of a number of Western European countries to impress upon them the urgent need for a cease-fire and a political solution to the conflict.

An important number of current conflicts indicate that the existing patterns of international boundaries do not correspond or, may be, have never corresponded to the realities and prerequisite of effective governance and require urgent corrections. The international community as a whole, and even more so that part of it which has been at the roots of many of today's world unjust situations should feel it its duty to constructively help redressing past errors.

The very notion of self-determination has remained behind history and is lacking consistency because most of the time it is interpreted as a notion stemming from the decolonisation period and therefore it leaves peoples' struggles outside international law. It definitely needs updating so as to better specify how its implementation can be calibrated within the context in which those aspiring to self-determination find themselves. 

The struggle of the Tamils provides a strong argument for determining when a people should have the right to declare itself independent and sovereign state. The current conflict began following independence in 1948, though it is an historical fact that the Tamils lost their homeland as a consequence of foreign colonial penetration. For the sake of time, let us leave aside any further historical reference to facts all too well known by now and just recall the 1977 elections when over 75% of Tamils voted for independence, a true plebiscite that instead of being considered as a conclusive proof of the Tamils' wish to govern themselves triggered instead an escalation of repression by the government

Considering the history of these past years and the government's refusal to even entertain the possibility of a dialogue the Tamils are well justified in believing today that their aspirations can only be fulfilled through the creation of an independent Tamil state.

Though mutual mistrust is a normal consequence of the war both sides have waged for more than 20 years a common ground must be encountered at a negotiation table. This is why our organisation appeals to this Commission to urge the government of Sri Lanka to reciprocate the LTTE 's cease-fire, to lift the economic blockade and to accept to begin negotiations with the LTTE with a view to reaching a just peace.