The rhetoric against the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and the resultant Provincial Councils, by the Government Ministers’ seems to be waning away. The reason or reasons for the calls for the abolition of the Constitutional amendment by ministers and various Sinhalese nationalist groups not being heard for about two weeks so far. Also the Government’s stance on the 13th Amendment and Provincial Councils even seems to be softening. If it is not an illusion, the reason for it may be the concern repeatedly expressed by Indian Government statement that the 13th Amendment should be implemented fully.

The Indian Government, whether it is led by the Congress Party or the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) or any other party, has been repeating this same sentence while leaders of various Governments in Lanka have been responding to it sometimes positively, mostly evasively. Only President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has claimed to reject Indian leaders’ suggestion to implement the 13th Amendment fully. Though not to their face but through discussions with Indian Media, in last year. However, the situation in respect of the Lankan nationality issue and devolution of power remain the same for the past 33 years since the signing of the Indo-Lanka Accord in 1987. It is a shame for both sides.

Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa has at times been cautious and diplomatic while being clever enough to encourage the Indian leaders and the Tamil leaders in Lanka, in their emphasis on more powers to the Provincial Councils. Far back as 13 January 2008, he had said in an interview with India’s TV that he wants to fully implement the 13th Amendment claiming that ‘it is the most practical answer to the Tamil minority’s demand for provincial autonomy.’ Apparently he assured to go beyond the 13th Amendment during discussions with the visiting Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and it was later confirmed by Government spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella. Even as recently as 5 August last year he again reiterated his ‘13 plus’ formula during a discussion with several small Tamil political parties that supported him.

Of course Tamil leaders and Sinhalese leaders have their own reasons to support and reject the concept of devolution of power as a solution to the nationality problem between the two communities. Indeed, in its legal and political sense, devolution of power is a double-edged process. Once one devolved powers to an administrative unit, with a certain area of land, apparently that nationality acquires legality to remain separated to some extent from the other parts of the country and look after its own affairs. At the same time, theoretically the devolution would have a pacifying effect as well on the people of the area concerned, as it would hand down a certain amount of power to their representatives to promulgate legislations to devolved subjects. This would minimise the need of the people of the peripheral unit to secede politically from the Centre, it is argued.

Unless these legal and political effects of devolution are balanced and especially if the political pacification fails, the legality of being a separate unit might be a stepping stone for the unit towards secession.

However, the power sharing is not relied on the real-time facilities and the recognition awarded by the Centre to the unit, but it is practically relied on the interpretation and practical acceptance of those facilities and recognition by the leaders of the relevant unit. Hence it is necessary to avoid the possibility of the rejection of minimum facilities and powers, being accepted and instead demand anything short of separation! This can happen depending on various emotional factors and political pressures exerted on the political leaders within the said unit.

For instance, when the concept of Provincial Councils was first mooted during the Round Table Conference in 1984 and the Political Parties Conference (PPC) in 1986 convened by the then President J.R. Jayewardene, almost all leftist parties and almost all Tamil groups and parties argued that it would be a viable solution to the national problem. Samasamajists led by Prof Vickramabahu proposed devolution on principles of equality, autonomy and right of self-determination. When the Provincial council system was practically established, though under military and political pressure exerted by India, the responses of those groups remained the same. Later, when the Provincial Councils system was seen unworkable, the LTTE’s refusal to budge, the leftist and Tamil groups also shifted their stance on the PC system. That is history, but now Gotabaya should abandon 20/20 and complete the 13th amendment.