Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="50KG" data-source="post: 23205533" data-attributes="member: 558780">  Sri Lanka: The Arrogance of Power : Myths, Decadence & Murder by [FONT=&quot]Dr. Rajan Hoole[/FONT]  <a href="https://www.colombotelegraph.com/?s=Count+Down+To+July+1983&x=14&y=4" target="_blank">Count Down To July 1983</a> –   Before we  quit this  chapter, we will take a closer look at events in Peradeniya  University  between 11th May – 10th June 1983. These events have in  retrospect an  important bearing on the violence of Black July. Their  occurrence  overlapped with attacks on Tamils in various parts of the  country and  particularly Trincomalee. The similarity of methods seems  more than a  co-incidence. We also see how the gullible and those wanting  to be  heroes on the cheap were readily drawn into a vortex of hate,  while  those dissenting were most often reduced to silent spectators. We  are  fortunate in being able to draw upon an excellent report prepared by  a  committee of inquiry appointed by the Vice Chancellor Prof. B.L.   Panditharatne. The members of the Committee were Kenneth M. de   Lanerolle, Dorai Calnaido and Mrs. T.K. Ekanayake.     On the  afternoon of 11th May 1983, by broad daylight in a very public  place –  the entrance to the University where Galaha Road branches off  from the  Colombo Road – the Sinhalese lettering on the plaque, with  University of  Peradeniya written in all three languages, was defaced.  Some paint with  cement-like substance had been used. The action was  undoubtedly  witnessed by many, but no one testified as to the actual  culprits.  Rumours were then spread that the defacement was the work of  Tamil  students. The report alludes to, and we heard separately, that  Tamil  nationalist slogans and posters were found in the University and   outsiders had come in and made threats that they and their supporters   among the students would teach the Tamils a lesson.  That night,  some Tamil students were watching a Tamil film in the  Science Faculty  canteen. At 9.30 P.M. the males among them were dragged  out by a group  of Sinhalese students led by W.A.D.T. (Thulsie)  Wickremasinghe and A.  Ekanayake – both of them 4th year science  students from Arunachalam  Hall. The Tamils were accused of defacing the  Sinhalese lettering on the  plaque, and were forced to deface with  black paint the Tamil lettering  on the name boards from Galaha Junction  to the Arts Faculty. This was  followed by attacks in several student  halls of residence.   According to the Report: “Throughout   the night of the 11th, gangs of students rampaged along the road and   made mayhem in the halls. Yet the Security Service (which believes only   in ‘acting on information received’) saw nothing and heard nothing. We   are left to wonder why these blind and deaf men remain on the pay-roll   of the institution. During this critical period what authority existed   within the campus was in eclipse. Not only did the Security Service   signally fail in its duty, but wardens and sub-wardens appear to have   abdicated their responsibility. Here was a situation which could not be   handled by the University’s own structures. Yet were serious attempts   made to call in the Police?…. The only happy feature of these   disturbances was the kindness shown by several Sinhala students to the   victims by warning them of possible attacks, advising them how to avoid   them and agreeing to look after their belongings in their absence. One   outstanding gesture of compassion was made by a Sinhala boy who had led   Mr. Navaratnam away to safety after he had been mauled and abandoned  in  front of Wijewardene Hall.”  The main  attacks on  students on the 11th night took place at Hilda Obeysekere  hall (HOH),  James Peiris Hall (JPH) and Marrs Hall (MH). HOH was  attacked about  9.45 PM by students armed with staves and parts of  furniture. They were  from other halls looking for particular students,  some of whom were  pointed out by fellow Sinhalese students. “….they  were aided and  abetted by students resident in the hall who pointed out  rooms occupied  by Tamils and generally helped in the identification of  victims. In  the process of discovering their suspects, the attackers  were not  averse, however, to threatening and doing bodily harm to other  Tamils  interrogated and when they forcibly entered their rooms.”  A particular  target was a  first year engineering student P. Balasooriyan who was  editing a Tamil  magazine and was accused of being a ‘tiger’. In trying  to escape  Balasooriyan jumped down a floor and injured himself. He was  then  identified by two fellow first year engineering students, Shantha   Ratnayake and Bandara, and was assaulted by several students including a   batch-mate W.M.V. Fernando. He was later found sweating and kneeling  on  the floor. Amidst the clamour of the mob demanding that ‘Tiger’   Balasooriyan be handed over to the Police, the Warden Dr. K.N.O.   Dharmadasa contacted the Vice Chancellor and Balasooriyan was handed   over to the Police the next morning. The CID later exonerated   Balasooriyan.  The Report adds on this ‘tiger episode’: “The   sub-wardens of Hilda Obeysekere Hall do not appear to have correctly   assessed the situation on the night of the 11th. Evidence has been   placed before us that the assaults and harassment of many Tamils had   taken place prior to and concurrently with the very long drawn-out   ‘tiger episode’. A prima facie case by appropriate authorities does not   appear to have been made against Balasooriyan before taking a very   serious step of sending him to the Police…. Dr. Dharmadasa himself   admitted that their prime concern was to defuse the situation… Had a   less hasty step been taken, regarding Balasooriyan, it would have saved   the authorities and his 300 accusers the ignominy of learning (later)   that the ‘tiger’ was only an ‘unoffending cat’!”  During the  incident the  Warden had been shown a bag containing some blocks, rubber  stamps and a  Tamil magazine that were considered proof of Balasooriyan’s   involvement with the ‘Tiger Movement’. It turned out that Balasooriyan   was openly editing and selling a cultural magazine Pudusu (‘New’)   which he had started while at school in Mahajana College, Tellipalai.   Much later Balasooriyan joined the NLFT, a small left group started by   Viswanandadevan, also a product of the Engineering Faculty, Peradeniya.   The NLFT was noted for its pungent criticism of the ultra- nationalism   of the Tigers. Balasooriyan later went to Britain. It further  highlights  the ridiculous nature of the incident at HOH. It was this  that led to  reports of subversive literature in the Colombo Press.  Evidently, in the  country’s premier university where about 25% of the  students and staff  were Tamil speaking, the authorities had no way of  verifying the  contents and nature of some writing in Tamil!  At Marrs Hall ‘C.   Maruthainar was trod on so mercilessly that he defecated, while a   Sinhala batch- mate who had helped to identify him averted his eyes’.   E. Sritharan who was hiding in the ceiling fell down, suffered four   broken ribs, damaged vertebrae and was hospitalised. S. Nagendran was   assaulted for the crime of contesting the Medical Students’ Association   elections by a group of students led by Dr. S. Gamage, a passed out   dentist, staying in the Hall illegally.  Mr. M.  Sivasangaram, a  lecturer in economics and a cripple, was living in room  No.1 on the  ground floor of Arunachalam Hall. The ramp which he used to  move from  one level to another in his wheel chair was taken away by  students on  the 11th evening. Perturbed by this he left Peradeniya with  the bulk of  the Tamil students on the 12th. Three members of the staff  (K.  Selvarajah, instructor in electrical engineering, K.  Jayanthakumaran,  lecturer in economics and R. Navaratnam, lecturer in  geography) stayed  behind.  About 9.00  P.M. on the  night of the 12th, the three staff members were pulled out,  taken to  the roundabout near Arunachelam Hall and attacked. The first  two  managed to escape from them, Jayananthakumaran with a fractured and   bleeding nose. Navaratnam was dragged along the road and was injured in   his knees and shoulders by being beaten with bamboo poles and a belt.   Thulsie Wickremasinghe, the fourth year science student identified   earlier, was the man with the belt.  On the 13th  the attackers  had become bolder. The Teaching Hospital is just outside  the  University, bordering the Medical Faculty at Galaha Junction. Here  it  was thought safe for the Tamils to reside outside and attend by day.   But the student assailants committed trespass by broad day light to   attack Tamils on those premises, even though notices warning students   about their conduct had been put up. Two final year medical students, V.   Muralitharan and K.R. Saseendran, were caught near the house officers’   quarters, forcibly taken under the railway bridge on Galaha Road and   were severely assaulted. The man whipping with the belt was again our   hero, Thulsie Wickremasinghe.   The Tamil  students later began to come back after the university  authorities set a  deadline for 31st May for their return. There were  then sporadic  attacks and attempts at arson in Akbar- Nell and Marrs  Halls. Notable  however were the very similar masked attacks on Tamil  students at  Arunachalem Hall and James Peiris Hall on 4th and 5th June  respectively.  The Report also observed that this was the first time that the University had been affected by communal tensions from outside.   Salient Features  The Report  cites the  memorandum of Dr. Premasiri, Director of Student Welfare: (1)  the seats  of trouble are in the Halls and (2) that there is an  anti-Tamil  element working insidiously in the University; and adds, “This view is expressed quite independently of him, by us in our Interim Report.” Apart from Dr. Premasiri, the Report names Dr. Ashley Halpe as one of those who provided crucial information for the Inquiry.  Modus Operandi  The modus operandi of the assailants had some striking similarities to the far greater violence of July 1983:  * The start of the violence was a real or contrived provocation. But a plan and preparations were ready in advance.  * Students  attacking a  particular hall came from outside armed with lists of  targetted  students. Residents mainly helped in locating the victims.  * Even though  the ring  leaders were widely known, it took the university authorities  four  weeks to suspend Wickremasinghe and Ekanayake, and that was after a   masked attack on returned Tamil students in Arunachalem, the hall in   which the two resided.  The Security  Service  behaved as though it was what the powers that be wanted and did   nothing. The Police were apparently not called on the 11th and 12th May.   When a medical professor called the Police on the 13th, the day the   Medical Faculty and Teaching Hospital came under attack by broad   daylight, the Police apparently told him (p.23 of the Report) that the   D.I.G’s authority was needed (even though the Teaching Hospital was   outside the University).  The Purpose  (Page 5 of the Report): “The   purpose of the campaign was to evict the Tamils from the Campus. In   complete defiance of authority and acting with blatant violence, the   attackers succeeded in achieving their ends”.  Mixed motives and effects of Propaganda  The Report notes (p.6): “At   some points, personal grudges appear to have taken precedence:  jealousy  at examination performance, some earlier quarrel, an  inferiority  complex etc.” It says on p31: “Among  the remarks  hurled by the Sinhala inquisitors at their victims are some  which give  the impression of an uninformed – even childish – attitudes  towards the  Tamils of this country;’ Tell Amirthalingam to build you a  university  in Jaffna!’ ,’ You are tigers!’,’ You belong to the Gandhiyam   Movement!’,’ You must learn Sinhala; don’t speak in Tamil or English!’   and so on”.  Refutes Justification for Attack  Some  justifications for  the attack too have similarities to those given for  the July 1983  violence: – viz. provocation by Tamil separatists and the  inadequacy of  the response from the State.  The Report observes (p.29): “It   may be argued that the students who staged this campaign against  Tamils  were forced to do so because the authorities had done nothing to   counter subversion in the University. Not one iota of proof has been   produced that the authorities had been apprised of such a situation nor   is there any evidence that they had heard such complaints and ignored   them.”  </blockquote>

Verification: Dahaya deken beduwama keeyada?

Top Bottom