GulfNews,  Sun Feb 26 22:01:04 EST 2006

    Colombo: The Sri Lankan Government is defending its claims that sections of the controversial Cease-Fire Agreement with the Tamil rebels was against the country's constitution, but has opted to go along with it for the sake of negotiations with the rebels.

The government's peace delegation which led talks with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) soon after its return from talks in Geneva maintained that the government's previous position challenging the legality of the agreement remains.

"The question of invalidity of the agreement (CFA) remains as before", a member of the peace delegation H.L. De Silva, a president's counsel told journalists.

"What we are doing now is to reach some understanding between the two sides," he said.
Full Story


_________________
- The Academic

GOSL being an elected Government should reject the CFA immediately. Looking at press reports Nimal Sripala DeSila said that the CFA is not valid mainly becasue the President didn't sign it but the Prime Minister did. This statement I lelieve is for international audience.

So the choices are clear,
a) MR to sign the agreement to remove the illegality
b) Reject the CFA immediately
c) Keep quiet without stiring any further as there is no choice other than to stick to the current CFA

GOSL statements in Sri Lanka says they have already amended the CFA acoording to Mahinda Chinthanaya. This piece is for domestic audience.

The dilema is for Sri Lankans living abroad to identify whether they should consume domestic or international message from the GOSL.

Please contribute your own views and comments. Posting 5 external links is not acceptable unless you
would like to discuss each one of them on the forum.

Anton Balasingham, the chief negotiator and political strategist of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), rejected outright the Sri Lanka government’s claim that the joint communiqué, issued after the Geneva talks, amounted to an amendment to the original Ceasefire Agreement. "This bizarre interpretation given by the President’s counsel, Mr H.L. De Silva is ridiculous and preposterous and totally unacceptable to the LTTE", Mr Balasingham told TamilNet when queried about the issue.
 
"The joint statement clearly points out that the parties discussed issues related the Ceasefire Agreement, reaffirming their commitment to respect and uphold the truce. What was agreed by the parties and enunciated in the joint statement falls within the framework of the Ceasefire Agreement. During the engagement the government delegation raised several issues and concerns, including the welfare of children affected by the armed conflict, for which we were compelled to respond, articulating our view. To argue such discourse entails a new intervention necessitating a supplementary amendment is absurd and illogical," the LTTE’s theoretician pointed out.

"The LTTE was totally against any amendments or revision of the original Ceasefire Agreement. Our delegation even threatened to walk out of the peace talks if the Sri Lankan government attempted to bring any changes in the original document. We have also out-rightly rejected H.L. De Silva’s contention that the Ceasefire Agreement is illegal and constitutionally invalid. It is very amusing to note that the Sri Lankan delegates, having failed to advance their ludicrous theories at the negotiating table in Geneva, are holding press meets in Colombo to propagate their defunct propositions. These sinister attempts to misrepresent the current peace dialogue will seriously impair the mutual trust between the parties and undermine the peace process”, Mr Balasingham declared.

Once again, Sri Lanka is heading for another missed opportunity by focusing on trivial matters.

The claim that CFA is illegal is not based on law or careful analysis of the document. Constitution of a country does not describe the kind of agreements (like CFA) a nation state can enter into or cannot entertain. It it were, the JVP and JHU would have gone to Supreme Court and squashed the CFA by now. (Look at the way they handled PTOMS)

All these claims of illegality are because of:

1. Save face and extricate President Rajapaksa from his ill-advised Mahinda Chinthanaya that was crafted to form an opportunistic alliance during presidential election.

2. Saving JVP/JHU from humiliation of eating a humble pie.

3. If and when cornered by LTTE at the negotiating table, legality (or illegality) of CFA may provide an exit that may be acceptable to international community.

Why would an eminent constitutional lawyer go all the way to a frozen land in the middle of February to discuss an illegal document with a terrorist group.  Does the President not breaking the very law (constitution) he has sworn in to protect?

If CFA is illegal, the proper think the representatives of a democratic country could have done is to explain the constitution and how the CFA violates the constitution. The GoSL team had the opportunity at Geneva but did not exercise it.

The GoSL should stop playing to the gallery and seriously deal with the issue.  Not even accepting the position they agreed only few hours earlier is outright dumb. The GoSL position is similar to the one LTTE took when they claimed they haven't agreed to look at the Federal option in Oslo.  In a way, the GoSL has demostrated it is no different from LTTE when it comes to weasle its way out of its commitments.

As far as CFA is concerned,
Infirmity - Yes

Illegal - No.

As I mentioned on another link the Supreme Court made reference to the CFA agreement in its ruling on the PTOMs, and it is clear that the government was within its constituional rights.

This is to merely hoodwink the southern extremists per previous ill conceived and chauvinistic election pledges, particularly in view of forthcoming local council elections.

Any honourable government got to abrogate the CFA if it is indeed found to be illegal. Inaction also has a meaning in that it is accepted.  The government cannot behave like an ostrich.

However, the Supreme Court did not find the CFA illegal in the context of P-TOMS.  Is the government saying the Supreme Court’s observations are wrong too?  It appears that the government wants to have the cake and eat it!

Similarly, the recent Geneva statement amounts to an amendment to the apparently illegal CFA according to the government while LTTE insists that this is not an amendment, rather just implementation pledge of the original CFA.  It would be interesting to see what the facilitator’s, for that matter IC’s, interpretations/views on this issue?  Still, it is puzzling how the government is amending the apparently illegal CFA to start with unless this amendment makes it legal? Does this make it legal?  Who is fooling whom?

Esteemed lawyer H. L. De Silva is losing his credibility and reputation by defending this lunatic and hypocritical semantics that is unfortunate for him.


_________________
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety - Benjamin Franklin

Diplomat says:

Quote:

Esteemed lawyer H. L. De Silva is losing his credibility and reputation by defending this lunatic and hypocritical semantics that is unfortunate for him.

I disagree.

The claim by H L de Silva that the joint declaration is an amendment to the CFA exposes de Silva for what he really is. Totally and absolutely EMPTY HEADED. HL's claim is one of the most ridiculus claims I have heard, coming from a person in a responsible position.

It is in Sri Lanka's interest that it protects the CFA. It has many imperfections which need to be fixed, but one should not forget that it is only the road to get to the right destination. It is the destination that matters. The road may have imperfections, but who cares as long as we move in the right direction. If more harm can be done to the CFA by trying to fix it, let us not lose touch with our main objective, i.e to keep Sri Lanka as one country.

The future of Sri Lanka as a single country will depend to a large extent on who ditches the CFA first. If the GOSL unilaterally pulls out of the CFA, Eelam will be almost inevitable. Likewise, if the LTTE, on its own initiative, turns its back on the CFA, the LTTE will self-destroy itself.

There is one word that can describe MR's approach to the problem in SL: CONFUSION. Rajapakse, following on the tradition of limited intelligence in recent Sri lankan leaders, is utterly confused and the disease has spread to everyone associated with him. They in turn confuse everyone.

Both the GOSL and the LTTE have proved to the world that they don't care two hoots for the spirit of the CFA. Let us see whether either party is bold enough, and foolish, to completely pull out. Such an action is suicidal for either party.