23.03.2009
The Editor,
The Island,
Colombo.
Dear Editor,
I was thoroughly upset after reading the article authored by Susantha Goonathilake captioned “Can those who question Sri Lanka’s sovereignty be C.C. Members?”, appeared on page 6 of your issue of 18th March. Whether any C.C properly constituted will maintain its credibility during a change of Government is a different matter. I do not want to enter into any controversy over this and prefer to limit my comments on some references made by the author on three eminent personalities.
Dr. Neelan Thruchelvam’s name had been dragged in irrelevantly. He was a Constitutional Lawyer of World repute. Being my colleague both in Parliament and in the TULF, I have a moral duty to clear his name. I do not even want to repeat what is said in the article in reference to him which is a shame-full one. But I should very firmly say that Dr. Neelan was a Gentleman of International repute, who never stooped to low levels. If there is any such publication in Tamil Nadu, demeaning the Sinhalese by referring to them as cannibals by any body else I apologise to the entire Sinhala race. If the author will give me further details of this so called publication, which I do not think is in existence, I will take it up with Tamil Nadu and tell them that the Tamils of Madurai have umbilical relationship with the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka, as often boasted by the Tamils of Tamil Nadu that they have similar relationship with the Tamils here.
Justice C. V. Vickneswaran was also a reputed Judge. If he was bold enough to make a speech, on his appointment as a Judge, that was subjected to adverse comments, that itself goes to his credit as a fair and fearless person. If his speech contained anything adverse to the Sovereignty of the state he should have been dealt with in 1987 itself and not 22 years later after he earned a name as a dignified Judge. Justice Vickneswaran is a person very much respected by all communities in this country and cannot be branded as a LTTE supporter. Typical of a judge he maintains salience in many matters.
Dr. Jayadeva Uyangoda, a very knowledgeable person, was the Head of the Political Department of the Colombo University and has a great reputation. If political horse-trading is the main grounds of opposition for these two appointments, it applies more to many other appointments to the Constitutional Council and an amendment to the 17th amendment become necessary relating to the appointments to the C.C. As for me, it is a pity that the country is losing the benefit of obtaining the services of two eminent personalities whose capacities cannot be challenged by anybody who know their worth. At this rate the Constitutional Council will never be constituted.
V. Anandasangaree,
President – TULF.
The Editor,
The Island,
Colombo.
Dear Editor,
CAN THOSE WHO QUESTION SRI LANKA’S SOVEREIGNTY BE C. C. MEMBERS
I was thoroughly upset after reading the article authored by Susantha Goonathilake captioned “Can those who question Sri Lanka’s sovereignty be C.C. Members?”, appeared on page 6 of your issue of 18th March. Whether any C.C properly constituted will maintain its credibility during a change of Government is a different matter. I do not want to enter into any controversy over this and prefer to limit my comments on some references made by the author on three eminent personalities.
Dr. Neelan Thruchelvam’s name had been dragged in irrelevantly. He was a Constitutional Lawyer of World repute. Being my colleague both in Parliament and in the TULF, I have a moral duty to clear his name. I do not even want to repeat what is said in the article in reference to him which is a shame-full one. But I should very firmly say that Dr. Neelan was a Gentleman of International repute, who never stooped to low levels. If there is any such publication in Tamil Nadu, demeaning the Sinhalese by referring to them as cannibals by any body else I apologise to the entire Sinhala race. If the author will give me further details of this so called publication, which I do not think is in existence, I will take it up with Tamil Nadu and tell them that the Tamils of Madurai have umbilical relationship with the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka, as often boasted by the Tamils of Tamil Nadu that they have similar relationship with the Tamils here.
Justice C. V. Vickneswaran was also a reputed Judge. If he was bold enough to make a speech, on his appointment as a Judge, that was subjected to adverse comments, that itself goes to his credit as a fair and fearless person. If his speech contained anything adverse to the Sovereignty of the state he should have been dealt with in 1987 itself and not 22 years later after he earned a name as a dignified Judge. Justice Vickneswaran is a person very much respected by all communities in this country and cannot be branded as a LTTE supporter. Typical of a judge he maintains salience in many matters.
Dr. Jayadeva Uyangoda, a very knowledgeable person, was the Head of the Political Department of the Colombo University and has a great reputation. If political horse-trading is the main grounds of opposition for these two appointments, it applies more to many other appointments to the Constitutional Council and an amendment to the 17th amendment become necessary relating to the appointments to the C.C. As for me, it is a pity that the country is losing the benefit of obtaining the services of two eminent personalities whose capacities cannot be challenged by anybody who know their worth. At this rate the Constitutional Council will never be constituted.
V. Anandasangaree,
President – TULF.
