The 15th year of the last three centuries seems to be disastrous to this country. I am particularly comparing what happened to Sri Lanka at the UNHRC this year with that of 1815. In 1815, the independence of Sri Lanka preserved for 2,300 years was offered on a platter to the British by some of the Kandyan Chieftains, ostensibly to be rid of the Wadiga King who was described by the British as a ‘tyrant’. Of course the ceding of the country without a fight, for the first time, was done on several conditions written down on what was called The Kandyan Convention. Some of the important conditions therein, among others, was the continuation of the Sinhala system of government and preservation of the place of the ‘Religion of the Buddhoo’ which the British violated in no time. As regards the latter condition, when objected to by Christian Missionaries, Robert Brownrigg, the British Governor of Colombo, who presided over the signing of the Convention explained that if they did not concede that, the Kandyans would never have agreed to cede their country. The simple-minded Buddhist prelates who were present on this occasion too were so naïve to believe the white-skinned British were in fact gentlemen who would honor their word.
Does it sound similar? The Sri Lankan Government agreed to make it a joint resolution with the US because the original words ‘Hybrid Courts’ was omitted to replace it with the paraphrasing the meaning of the same term with ‘joint mechanism’ having foreign judges, lawyers and new laws legal reforms needed etc. if not for which primafacie it would have looked a total surrender. Then, in order to save face, our President says that had they not agreed to this arrangement the Report would have been hundred times or thousand times worse. What would have been worse than this, one could not imagine. What he did not know, is that if we did not agree to accept the UNHRC Resolution, they could not have proceeded to have an international investigation in Sri Lanka. They would have had to go through the UN Security Council. The only way they could circumvent this problem was by getting us to agree to accept, by twisting our arm. The situation was compounded by the Prime Minster who probably intended to assuage the Armed Forces saying that it was not the three Services that the Intl Community was after but the Judiciary. It is not difficult to realize once they had dealt with the Judiciary in the way they want, Armed Forces would be the next target. It is difficult to imagine that the Prime Minster could be so naïve not to see through this. It is more logical that he was trying to pull wool over the naiveté of the people with whom the sovereignty is supposed to lay inalienably.
Once all this is accomplished everyone but the government could anticipate what is to follow. Could a government be so foolish or are they trying to look foolish deliberately while they are acting on a predetermined plan like the Pied Piper of Hamlin? Which sensible government of a sovereign country would accept such an intrusive directives to change its laws to formulate new laws, to target its Forces that won a ‘war’ for them after 30 years of fighting sacrificing so many lives and, that too to take effect with retrospective effect, directives also to sack those in command identified by such ‘courts’, withdraw its Forces from specific parts of the country and downsize their Military as directed and also change their constitution on the lines suggested by them? Have we already ceded our country to the ‘International Community’/ Western Powers? Is it any different from what happened in 1815?
It took over 150 years to extricate our country from being a British colony. Could anyone imagine whether we could ever come out of this self-imposed subjugation? What shall we do?
I quote below a correspondence between Ehelepola Adikarama who was accompanying the British troops to take Kandy, and Molligoda Adikarama who was leading the Udarata troops at a barrier below Kadugannawa.