MDMK leader Vaiko on Friday appeared before New Delhi’s Tribunal set to hear petitions against the ban of the LTTE in India, to argue that he should be involved in the hearing and to plead that the ban extended by the Central Government on 14 May 2010 should not be confirmed by the Tribunal. The very first reason given by GOI for the ban that the Tamil Eelam objective of the LTTE includes Tamil Nadu, falls to the ground to pieces as the LTTE never wanted to annex an inch of land of Tamil Nadu, Vaiko said, adding that GOI’s reasons are totally fabricated with falsehood. The Tribunal judge Vikramjit Sen was specific in raising the question “Don’t they [the LTTE] want to annex Tamil Nadu or part of India with Tamil Eelam?”
Vaiko, General Secretary of Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhakam (MDMK)
Political observers in Chennai commented that the continuation of the ban is counterproductive, as now it only hampers the imminent need to evolve a genuine democratic polity for a righteous cause, and thus paves way for further social and political unrest. The ban, implicitly intimidating any political and democratic opinion in favour of the national cause of Eezham Tamils and exploited in practice to brand any spirited Tamil opinion as that of the LTTE, steadily abets genocide and colonisation in Tamil Eelam, the observers said.
The first reason mentioned in the ban notification is that the LTTE’s objective for a separate homeland (Tamil Eelam) for all Tamils, threatens the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India, and amounts to cession and secession of a part of the territory of India from the Union and thus falls within the ambit of an unlawful activity.
When Vaiko explained that Tamil Eelam is a justifiable demand of Eezham Tamils for an independent nation only in the north and east of the island, the judge asked “Mr. Vaiko, the LTTE, don’t they want to annex Tamil Nadu or part of India with Tamil Eelam?”
“My Lord, I am really happy for this opportunity to clarify this vital point. The LTTE never wanted to annex even an inch of land of Tamil Nadu with their Tamil Eelam,” Vaiko replied.
“Could the Union Government of India prove that the LTTE did mention in any of their periodicals or manifesto or publications? They could not. This is beyond any stretch of imagination of Eelam Tamils. This is a vicious, malicious campaign made deliberately by the Indian Government to malign the LTTE,” Vaiko told the Tribunal.
When Vaiko brought out the example that the liberation of Bangladesh was not annexation of West Bengal, the judge Sen [a Bengali], with a smile said, “Such a talk was also there,” to which Vaiko said that it didn’t happen.
As people supporting liberation is universal, as seen in the cases of Kosovo, East Timor and Palestine, and as the LTTE is no threat to territorial integrity of India, how could establishing Tamil Eelam come within the ambit of ‘unlawful activity’ in India, argued Vaiko.
The following are the other reasons cited by India for the extension of the ban, countered by Vaiko:
2. Pro-LTTE forces in India exploit the situation to draw support for the LTTE and their demonstrations processions etc threaten security of Tamil Nadu:
Vaiko said that in a democracy the government cannot expect all to applause it and the government abuses the ban to silence opposition.
3. Though the LTTE decimated in the island the remnants are regrouping in Tamil Nadu to wreck revenge on traitors (Government of India) and enemies (Government of Sri Lanka):
“I think, it may be the manifestation of a pricking conscience. But, I say, India has betrayed,” Vaiko said.
The Judge pressed, “Who says?”
“My Lord, I say this. The Government of India has betrayed Eelam Tamils. I have written letters to the Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh, accusing the Indian Government’s betrayal for which he replied to me, dated 2nd October 2008, admitting the fact that India has provided military assistance to protect the unity of Sri Lanka,” Vaiko answered.
4. The remnant cadres may come as refugees and use India, especially Tamil Nadu as a rear base:
“This reason should be totally rejected by this tribunal,” Vaiko said adding that it paves way for branding those who come escaping genocide, for persecution and harassment of them and for sending them to prison camps or for deporting them.
“The Tamils have become international orphans, because of this ban, which is fully exploited by the Government to throw the Tamils into the valley of tears,” Vaiko pointed out.
5. The diaspora spreading anti-India feeling through articles in the internet portals, by holding the top Indian Political leaders and bureaucrats as responsible for the defeat of the LTTE, is likely to impact VVIP security adversely in India.
“This is an Internet Age,” Vaiko said, pointing out that it is not merely the diaspora, but human right activists in many countries have raised voice condemning the genocide of Tamils.
Vaiko cited the Dublin Tribunal in which the second member of the panel of judges was a former Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi. Vaiko also cited a cabinet minister of Colombo calling the UN Secretary General an “international pimp” for initiating war crimes investigation.
“The alleged propaganda that Indian political leaders and bureaucrats responsible for the defeat of the LTTE is not an unlawful activity as defined in the act,” Vaiko pointed out.
Vaiko’s request to implead him in the proceedings was objected by the council of GOI on grounds that Vaiko is neither an office bearer nor a person authorised by the LTTE to be involved in the proceedings.
Vaiko said that he was personally affected by the ban as two cases against him in this regard are still pending in the courts.
According the Central Government, the LTTE is not functioning and therefore there would not be any possibility of serving the notice on the LTTE as contemplated by the act, Vaiko argued.
As there is no possibility for the LTTE to respond to the notification, and as there is not even a remote possibility for the functioning of the said association, which according to the Central Government is decimated, Vaiko argued that he should be involved as he is personally affected.
He was seeking natural justice in such circumstances
“My Lord, I would submit that the principles of natural justice as a part of procedural law developed and has been applied and extended to quasi-judicial proceedings and administrative matters to ensure that no one is adversely affected without reasonable opportunity,” Vaiko pleaded.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow TNN on Facebook and Twitter )