sign in sign up
<<
Home , Katchatheevu, Palk Strait, Talaimannar

The Betrayed Indian Territory

Seethayin Maindhan Prime Co-ordinator Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement

Published by Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement www.katchatheevu.com

Aided by Ilanthamilarani www.ilantamilar.org

1 Title : Katchatheevu Preface The Betrayed Indian Territory Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement is a non-political organisation of citizens concerned with the safety and security of the Indian Fisherman of Tamilnadu. We have done an enormous research Author : Seethayin Maindhan on Katchatheevu and arrived a conclusion that retrieval of Katchatheevu alone will protect the lives of our fishermen and Language : English uphold the sovereignty and dignity of our nation. Because of our hard efforts we have elevated this issue from Edition : First Edition the state level to the National level.

Year : June 2011 The continued firing upon the Indian fishermen of Tamilnadu has created a political storm in and the Katchatheevu Copy Right : Author island has assumed political significance. Other than the Congress party almost all other political parties in Tamil Nadu are in favour of retrieving Katchatheevu. The Prime opponent party of Paper : 16kg Maplitho our country B.J.P. is also in favour of retrieving Katchatheevu. Most of the parties feel that the 1974 and 1976 agreements are Size : 1/8 a stumbling-block in the path of retrieving Katchatheevu island. Many books and articles written on the subject of Katchatheevu Pages : 80 island have proceeded on a preconceived notion that the 1974 and 1976 agreements are final which can’t be un-nulled. This book Typeset : Success Enterprises, aims at dispelling the notion that the 1974 and 1976 agreements are Chennai - 14. solemn and cannot be un-nulled. This book establishes that these agreements which tend to part with a territory of this Nation has Printed at : Success Enterprises to be ratified and in the absence of Ratification these agreements lacks sanctity and enforceability. Chennai - 14. Knowingly or unknowingly some persons are suggesting to take Price : Rs. 50 the island on a long term lease. Selvi J. Jayalalitha might have been misguided by one of such persons in the past otherwise she would Published by : Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement not have presented a memorandum to Prime Minister Manmohan www.katchatheevu.com Shing to retrieve Katchatheevu through “lease in perpetuity” on 16-09-2004 as she stated in the Assembly on 09-11-2011 This idea if implemented will ensure and uphold the Srilanka’s sovereignly over Katchatheevu for ever. 2 3 Now the Chief Minister Jayalalitha has taken the right In this connection, it is to be noted that the traditional rights step towards retrieving the island from Srilanka by passing of our fishermen ensured in the 1974 agreement in the a unanimous resolution at the assembly on 09-06-2011. The were not withdrawn in the subsequent 1976 agreement. But the state Assembly of Tamilnadu on 09-06-2011 adopted a unanimous fulfillment of these traditional rights has been in abeyance since resolution calling upon the State Revenue Department to implead 1983 due to the security situation in the Palk Strait. If the above itself in the case already filed by Jayalalitha in August 2008, sought ban is now removed, then the traditional rights ensured in the 1974 the declaration of the 1974 and 1976 agreements between agreement can be restored. Hon. Chief Minister of Tamilnadu and Srilanka unconstitutional. The Tamilnadu State Revenue Selvi. J. Jayalalitha may confirm the above fact and act upon it to Department if impleaded in the above case it will definitely remove the ban so as to enable our fishermen to get some interim strengthen the argument seeking the declaration of the 1974 & relief at this juncture. 1976 agreements unconstitutional for the reasons narrated below. As far as the Katchatheevu is concerned all the evidences are In the above case, in its counter affidavit filed on 1-4-2011 in favour of India. The Srilanka is showing only one document before the honourable Supreme Court, the Central Government has by name “1921 Pact” on its favour. The British officers submitted that it is not necessary to get the Parliament Ratification signed in the above document on behalf of the Government of for the 1974 and 1976 agreements. The Central Government has Madras had clearly concluded the pact stating as follows. counted as above because according to the constitution of India, foreign affairs and the powers to make treaties vest within the “The above is signed by us, representatives of the Government exclusive jurisdiction of the Central Government. But at the same of Madras without prejudice to any territorial claim which may be time the Indian Constitution does not permit nor does it authorize made by the Government of India to the island of Kachchativu”. any person to cede the country’s territory to any other nation. C.W.E. Cotton Therefore the Central Government will try to argue or betray that G.H. Finnis the Katchatheevu island is not an Indian Territory and therefore Colombo James Hornell the ratification of the Parliament is not necessary for the 1974 and 25th October 1921 A.G. Leach 1976 agreements. Hence Selvi Jayalalitha has to prove that the Katchatheevu island is an undisputed land, an Indian Territory Sri Swaran Singh former Minister of External Affairs belongs to Tamil Nadu to win the case. Now one can realize the betrayed by hiding the above fact deliberately when he historic significance of the Resolution passed in the Tamil Nadu mentioned the above 1921 Colombo Pact in support of State Assembly calling upon the State Revenue Department Srilanka in the Parliament on 23-07-1974. to implead itself in this case. Hearty Congratulations to our The dispute surrounding the Katchatheevu island had always Hon’ble Chief Minister Selvi J. Jayalalitha. been identified with the ethnic conflict in the island of Srilanka. While the case is on one side in the Supreme Court, on the After its independence, Srilanka has taken a hostile stand against other side in the Parliament, one of the A.I.A.D.M.K. Parliament Tamils. Srilanka began with dis enfranchising the Tamils of Indian Member should move a Private Member Bill or Resolution to origin. Srilanka declared them stateless and sent back nearly 5 abrogate the 1974 and 1976 agreements by questioning the legality lakhs of Tamils to India. This was followed by asking its claim of these agreements. on Katchatheevu. After seizing Katchatheevu cunningly, Srilanka 4 5 launched its vicious campaign against the ethnic Eelam Tamils. Srilanka always aimed at subrogating Tamils and the issue of Contents Katchatheevu island should be analyzed on this basis also. This book was first published in Tamil and received wide spread 1. Location Map of Katchatheevu 8 appreciation. English transcripts of few chapters of the Tamil Book were circulated to the political leaders, Parliament Members of 2. Katchatheevu Island and The 1974 - 1976 Agreements 9 other states outside Tamilnadu. On 04-02-2011 when we met Smt. 3. Atrocities Faced by Tamilnadu Fishermen 24 Sushmaswaraj, Leader of Opposition at Chennai we realized the need to bring out a English version of the book in whole. 4. Witness Testimony 26 Thanks to Mr. P. Amarnath, Advocate, Chennai for his assistance 5. Katchatheevu is ours - Evidences 31 in translating the Tamil book in English. But for his assistance 6. The Dictorial Act of Congress 35 and advice it would not have been possible to bring out this book in English. 7. Katchatheevu and the Indian Tamils of Srilanka 39 Thanks to ‘Ilanthamilarani’ friends for their timely economic 8. Details of the Debate in the Parliament on 23-07-1974 41 help to publish this book in English. 9. Karunanidhi and Katchatheevu 49 Chennai-24 Seethayin Maindhan Dt : 10-06-2011 Prime Co-ordinator 10. Chief Minister Selvi J. Jayalalitha can achieve 53 Cell : 9884227293 Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement. 11. Thanks to BJP Leaders 55 e-mail : [email protected] 12. Our Five Main Demands 57 13. Who Are Tamils? 63 14. Jaihind 68 15. 1974 Agreement copy 69 16. 1976 Agreement Copy 72 17. Exchange of Letter Copy 76 18. India - Srilanka Maritime Boundary Map 79 18. References 80

6 7 KATCHATHEEVU ISLAND AND location of katchatheevu THE 1974-1976 TRAITOROUS AGREEMENTS The Island of Katchatheevu is a part of the Indian Union. It is very much within the sovereign and territorial limits of this Nation. Yet, the Central Government refuses to acknowl- edge this basic fact and transcending all its Constitutional authority, the Centre has allowed Sri to exercise its su- zerainty over Katchatheevu Island. This has emboldened the Sri Lankan navy to continue with its unabated killing of our Tamil Fishermen. While, the Central Government is solely re- sponsible for this malady, the DMK which occupies a predom- inant position in the Centre remains a mute spectator over the happenings. Over the years the Government of India is making an unfounded statement that it has ceded its rights over Katchatheevu Island. By reciting the same statement over a long period of time, this untrue statement is now made to be believed as true. In the case of Katchatheevu Island this drama is unfolding since 1974. On 31.08.2010, during the discussion in the Lok Sabha and in earlier discussions in the Rajya Sabha, over Katchathee- vu Island, the External

Krishna, asserted the Affairsfollowing Minister as his reply Mr.S.M. which are in fact false statement:

8 9 “Katchatheevu Island belong to ” with the rights of the respective nations over the demarcated “What had been given is given” area. THE SECOND AGREEMENT : “The agreement is solemn” The second agreement was entered into in the year “It cannot be abrogated” 1976, between the foreign Secretaries of both the nations. It “It is not possible to provide security to the fisher- covered the remaining area viz., the and Gulf of men who transcend the borders” Mannar, which were hitherto not covered in the earlier 1974 agreement. This agreement dealt with the rights of the re- “Sri Lanka is our friendly Nation” spective nations over these sectors. What Mr. S.M. Krishna is referring to as solemn is the Both the 1974 and 1976 agreements are indepen- Agreement of the year 1974. This agreement can at the dent of each other and they deal with two different sec- most be termed as a half printed currency note. tors in the . The covenants and substance of both these It requires patience and endurance to understand the agreements are entirely different. Both these agreements issue of Katchatheevu Island. The Sea between India and Sri are often mistaken as pertaining to one and the same is- sue and this confusion serves as an asset to the opponent Lanka is divided into Three Sectors. while it is a malady to us. 1. The sea between and up to Before venturing to understand the 36 year long contin- Adams BridgSe, which constitute the Palk Strait. (Katchathee- vu Island is situated in this Sector at a distance of 11 nauti- ourselves of our doubt in this issue. The 1974 agreement cal miles North East from Rameswaram and 18 nautical miles uedsigned sufferings by leaders of ofour both Tamil the fishermen,nations and wewhich should is vehement first clear- North West from Sri Lanka’s Talaimannar). ly relied on by Mr.S. M.Krishna, requires an in-depth study. 2. The which is situated south of Adams THE 1974 INDO SRILANKAN MARITIME BOUNDARY Bridge. AGREEMENT : 3. The remaining portion excluding the Palk Strait and This agreement consists of VIII Articles. Article I, deals with demarcating the Maritime Boundary over Palk Straits Gulf of Mannar the Bay of Bengal. which comprises the Katchatheevu Island. The principle of The Government of India and Sri Lanka have executed Equi-Distance demarcation, normally followed in Interna- two agreements one during 1974 and another during 1976, tional treaties was not followed, but instead the demarcation over these three Sectors. was carried on with a sole object of forgoing Katchatheevu Is- THE FIRST AGREEMENT : land to Sri Lanka. As such the Maritime Boundary was drawn above Katchatheevu Island at its West. If the principle of The then Indian Prime Minister Mrs.lndira Gandhi and Equi-Distance demarcation was followed, the Maritime the then Sri Lankan President Mrs.Bandara Naickae executed Boundary would have fallen to the East of Katchathee- vu Island and the Island would be well within the In- 1974, which amongst other things, primarily dealt with de- dian Maritime Boundary. The United States did not agree marcatingthe first ever the agreement sea boundary on Katchatheevu around Palk Island, Strait whichin the comyear- to this demarcation, which did not follow the principle of prises the Island of Katchatheevu. This agreement also dealt Equi-Distance demarcation. In a nutshell, the principle of

10 11 Equi-Distance Demarcation, hundreds of documents from the is based on this principle of joint exercise of suzerain power year 1605 and the uninterrupted possession over the Island and not a complete ceding of territory as it is being portrayed over the past thousand years would establish that the Island by Mr.S.M.Krishna. of Katchatheevu is part of the Indian territory. Even then the act of foregoing the territory of Island The fact that Katchatheevu Island is an Indian territory of Katchatheevu by is an act contrary to and had been ceded to Sri Lanka is embedded in Article V of the Constitution of India. The Indian Constitution does the agreement which deals with the traditional rights of the not permit nor does it authorize any person to cede the Fishermen and Pilgrims to go over to the Katchatheevu is- country’s territory to any other Nation. land. In 1958 when the village of Berubari was to be ceded ARTICLE V : to Pakistan, the then Indian President make a reference to Subject to the Foregoing Indian fishermen and pil- the Supreme Court, under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution grims will enjoy access to visit Katcha Teevu as hitherto of India, seeking its view on the constitutionality of ceding and will not be required by Sri Lanka to obtain travel doc- the territory. The Supreme Court constituted an 8 member uments or visa for these purposes. Article VI of the agree- Bench, which after much deliberation, advised the Union Gov- ment protects the Indian fishing vessels right to venture ernment, to carry out necessary amendments to Article 368 into and stay in Sri Lankan waters. before ceding the territory. Accordingly, the Union Govern- ARTICLE VI : ment amended Article 368 and thereafter ceded the territory to Pakistan. The vessels of India and Sri Lanka will enjoy in each other’s waters such rights as they have traditionally en- When Nehru Attempted to cede Beru Bari joyed therein. “The Forward Block party severely condemn the countries of Gas and other mineral resources that may be attempt of Prime Minister discoveredArticle in VII this deals Sector. with Although, effective this utilization agreement by include both the Nehru to cede the Beru Bari - region, a part of West Bengal ment upholds and safeguards the traditional rights of our to Pakistan without consult- ceding Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka, in effect this agree ing the west Bengal Govern- of Katchatheevu and the area surrounding it. The Island of ment. It is a wrong proceed- Katchatheevufishermen over had this remained sector of within the Sea, the suzerainty which include of both Island the ings which is against our Nations. Constitution as per article 3 When two sovereign nations exercise their suzerainty of the constitution. I call upon the nation particularly the over a land or Island, such joint exercise of power is termed people of west Bengal to unite together and prepare for all a Condominium. International Law permits exercise of such suzerain power by two or more nations over rivers, and soil”. the land mass abutting the sea. The exercise of joint suzerain kinds- ofMuthuramalingathevar Sacrifices to retain Beru in a BariPress within meet at our Calcutta Indian power by England and France since 1934 over Candon and on 29/02/1959. Endenbury is a best example. The 1974 Indo Sri Lankan Pact, 12 13 Mrs.Indira Gandhi, who signed the 1974 agreement such rights over the Katchatheevu Island and the surround- ing Seas. I challenge Mr.S.M.Krishna to defer with me. If he of the need to obtain a Constitutional sanction before ceding could disprove my statement I am ready to face the gallows. withthe Island Sri Lanka of Katchatheevu. and her other Article officials VIII as well,of the are agreement quite aware re- If my statement is upheld, will Mr.S.M.Krishna, amputate his tongue for having repeated a false and disproved statement. take place at the earliest possible time. THE INDO SRI LANKAN MARITIME BOUNDARY fers to ratification and exchange of instruments which should ARTICLE VIII : AGREEMENT OF THE YEAR 1976 This agreement shall be subject to ratification. It While, the 1974 agreement had elaborately dealt with shall enter into force on the date of exchange of the in- Palk Strait which included the Island of Katchatheevu, the struments of the ratification which will take place as 1976 agreement signed by the Foreign Secretaries of both the soon as possible. Nations deals with the remaining areas in the Gulf of Man- Article VIII of the agreement stipulates obtaining a rati- nar and Bay of Bengal, which were not covered under the - 1974 agreement. This agreement was signed on 24.03.1976 ment to the constitution before enforcing the agreement. No and contains VII Articles. Article I, demarcates the maritime fication, which could be done by bringing a suitable amend boundary in the Gulf of Mannar and Article II, demarcates the agreement has lost its sanction, has become inoperative and boundary over the Bay of Bengal. such ratification or sanction has been obtained. As such this S.M.Krishna, before Parliament, that this agreement cannot Article V, contains sub clauses 1, 2 and 3 which have beunenforceable. abandoned it The a contemptuous statement of Externalstatement Affairs transcending Minister the Mr. similar connotation pertaining to exercise of sovereign and economic rights over Islands, Isles, sand dunes and over bio- Prime Minister and his Council of Minister should be held re- logical and fossils which fall under their respective demar- Constitution,sponsible. It isfor this which agreement act, the Externalof the year Affairs 1974, Minister,which has the cated territory. Both the Country has a right to venture into contributed to killing of nearly 500 Indian Fishermen, perma- the territorial Seas of the other Country, and over its exclusive nently disabled 1000 of them and disappearance at the same economic zone, of course fully honoring the Law of the re- number. This agreement which makes a mockery of the Indi- spective land and the International Law. ARTICLE V-3 : Mr.S.M.Krishna, as declared by him before the parliament “a ansolemn Constitution, agreement.” is according Mr.S.M.Krishna to our Externaland his Ministerial Affairs Minister, coun- Each party shall respect rights of navigation through terparts have failed to remember having taken an oath to pro- its territorial sea and exclusive economic zone in accordance tect and preserve the Constitution. with its law and regulations and rules of international law. The numerous documents in hand, our Constitutional The essence of the forgoing articles is that one Country provisions, the covenants in the 1974 agreement, supports should not traverse its ship over the territorial Seas of the our view that India has a suzerain power over the Island of other Country, without obtaining its permission. This had Katchatheevu, and continues to exercise that power and will continue to exercise the power over Katchatheevu and the Singh, who in his letter to his Sri Lankan counterpart, written beenon 23.03.1976, affirmed by the the date then on Indian which Foreign the agreement Secretary, was Mr.Keval signed,

surrounding Seas. In effect the14 Indian fishermen too exercise 15 representative of the Indian Government. It is not necessary territorial Sea of the other Country.” that the Government should accept the agreement and act held that “fishermen from one Country shall not fish in the It is imperative to note that this condition will ap- according to it. In fact Keval Singh did not have any author- ply only to the sector surrounding the Gulf of Mannar and ity to sign the agreement which will bind this Nation. The the Bay of Bengal and not in the sector surrounding Palk Government can accept the agreement or rescind it. No ex- Strait, Katchatheevu Island, which sector had already planation needs to be given as to why the agreement was re- been covered under the earlier 1974 agreement, wherein scinded. The agreement could be accepted or could be con- it had been agreed that fishermen of both the countries had a right to fish transcending maritime boundaries. agreements signed by a representative of a nation. Unfor- finedtunately, to a Mr.S.M.Krishna dustbin. This is has how failed international to understand law treatsthis basic the fact and continues to maintain that the agreement cannot be which reads: “Recalling that the boundary in the Palk Strait un-nulled unilaterally. This agreement has not been entered This is affirmed in the preface of the 1976 agreement had been settled by the agreement between the Republic of into between two Countries, but only amongst the represen- India and the Republic of Sri Lanka on the boundary in His- tatives of both the Countries. It is better that Mr. S.M.Krishna, toric waters between the two countries and related matters read the agreement once again. signed on 26/28 June 1974.” The Rajiv-Jayawardane agreement, envisaged merg- This agreement of the year 1976 has sealed the fate of er of the Northern and Eastern into a unified Tamil Province. The JVP organization chal- over the Gulf of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal continuously lenged this agreement before the Sri Lankan Supreme the Indian Fishermen, who hitherto were fishing unhindered for the past thousand years and more. By stipulating restric- Court, which ultimately annulled the treaty. If Sri Lank- ans could do this, why can’t we do a similar act to protect the life and dignity of our Indian Tamil Fishermen. Fishermentions over their became fishing targets rights, for thethe onlySri Lankan source Navy.of livelihood Although of Articlethe fishing V-3 ofcommunity this agreement, had been stipulates challenged that andboth the the Indian coun- Even if an agreement had been truly entered into tries should respect the International Laws, seldom the Sri between two Nations, and on a later period if any change Lankan Navy cared for the International Law and in case of in circumstance warrants annulment of the agreement, violations by the Indian Fishermen had acted in a most bar- such annulment can be done. The International Law baric manner. terms this as Rebus Sic Standi Bus principle. Does the same situation which existed in Sri Lanka during 1974- Article VII of this agreement contemplates ratifica- 1976 exist now? tion of the agreement before enforcement. But till date the agreement has not been ratified. This agreement has China has conceived its PEARL GARLAND idea, solely not got its parliamentary sanction and could well be de- aimed at weakening the sovereign and territorial integrity clared as unenforceable. of India. Under its PEARL GARLAND scheme China has now established basis in Kedar in Pakistan, Hang Hi in Miyanmar Keval Singh has signed the 1976 agreement in his ca- (Burma), in Maldives Island and in Ambanthotta in Sri Lan- pacity as the Foreign Secretary. He can only be termed as the ka. Lastly, China has set its foot in Katchatheevu Island also.

16 17 Pilgrims who went to Katchatheevu Island on the annual There may even be men belonging to the Sri Lankan intelli- St.Anthony’s Church festival have reported seeing Chinese gence. They could have very well collected maps and sketches Army Tents. Few foreign media and establishments have also of important places, Towns and place of worship in Tamilnadu unfolded the presence of Chinese Army men in Katchatheevu and could well have forwarded the same to their Lakshar-e- Island. The Tamil Indian Fishermen, who were attacked by Taiba counterparts, who could create panic and terror in this the Sri Lankan Navy have reported the presence of Chinese Country. It will be the innocent Hindu and Muslim brethren Army men aboard the Sri Lankan Naval Ships. It is reported that more than one lakh Chinese Army men and nearly 25,000 brush aside these fear? who in the end will be affected. Can Mr.S.M.Krishna simply Chinese convicts have been made to settle down in Sri Lanka. Mahinda Rajapakshae, has now introduced certain In a bomb blast incident reported from the Eastern part of Sri amendments in the Lankan parliament elevating him to a Lanka, nearly 70 persons were killed when 3 explosive laden stature of a Dictator. The Lankan Army commander Sarath Ponseka, has forewarned a possibility of a coupe in Sri Lanka. India should watch these critical and crucial develop- lorrycrackers. belonging Now China to Chinese has established Army burst not into only flames. its bases Certainly, in the ments and utilize the opportunity to abrogate the 1974 and NorthernChina would and not Eastern have Partbrought of Sri these Lanka, explosives it has established to make fire its 1976 agreements and thereby facilitate-free movement for our colonies in these areas. Does not the presence of China, in Sri These Lanka threaten the safety and security of India? How does Mr. fishermen, who roamed about freely in this Eastern Seas S.M.Krishna view this development? fishermenfor thousands over ofthe years entire were waters the in unpaid the Eastern guardian Seas. angels protecting our maritime borders. Lakshar-e-Taiba terrorist inside Pakistan. Recently, a Lakshar- As per article 21of our constitution it is the bounden e-TaibaAmerica terrorist has who put India was arrestedon alert about in connection the infiltration with the of duty of the U.P.A government to safeguard the lives of the Bomb-Blast in Germa Bakery in the Maharastra City of Pune has confessed having been trained in Colombo in Sri Lanka. aliens. Unfortunately, Mr.S.M.Krishna does not seem to take this con- fisherman of tamilnadu since they are also Indians and not the presence of nearly 200 Lakshar-e-Taiba men in Sri Lanka. declared in the parliament that they could not protect those Hfessionow Mr.S.M.Krishna seriously. American is going intelligence to act on this? has Does also confirmedhe thinks, But S.M.Krishna Minister for external affairs openly that Lakshar-e-Taiba aims to killing only foreigners and not We have already seen that even though Katcha Theevu fishermen who trancend the maritime extender line. Indian nationals? was ceaded to Srilanka in the 1974 agreement, the tradi- Mahinda Rajapakshae, who is instrumental in bringing down hundreds of Hindu Temples in , is now tour- Palk straits were protected as per article 5 and 6 of the above tional rights of Indian fisher men over Katcha Theevu, over ing Tirupati, Sri Rangam, Madurai and Rameswaram. Along agreement. with him, he brings his men in large numbers. All of them Shri. Swaran Singh, formerly minister for external being Buddhist by birth and practice, cannot be expected to his epilogue while answering a question raised by Shri. affairs had already confirmed this in the parliament in have come here to offer prays.18 Their agenda may be different. 19 M.Kalyanasundaram, M.P on 23.07.1974. Both the question Government of India regards the delineation of the and answer are narrated below indo Srilanka maritime boundary through the Agree- Shri M.Kalyanasundaram : The Tamilnadu government ment of 1974 and 1976 as settled matter. In terms of has a grievance that it has not been consulted properly. May I these agreements the island of Katchateevu lies on the know what is the actual fact in regard to that? Srilankan side of the International Boundary line. The Agreement states that Indian fishermen and pilgrims I also want to know the details about the protection given will enjoy access to visit Katchatheevu as heitherto and with regaurd tofishing rights. will not be required by Srinlanka to obtain travel docu- Shri Swaran Singh : About the traditional rights if the ments or visas for these purposes. Fulfillment of these honourable members go through the terms of the agreement a traditional rights has been in abeyance since 1983 due to copy of which has been placed on the table of the house,he will the security situation in the Palk straits get the answer because it is mentioned rights of Indian fisher- man and to visit the island will remain unaffected. Similarly the Now the situation has completely changed after 19th traditional navigation rights exercised by India and Srilanka may 2009. The Srilankan government have already declared in each others waters will remain unaffected that they have destroyed L.T.T.E totally in Srilanka. The Tamil- nadu police have also stated that there is no L.T.T.E movement [Source: Loksabha Debate - July 23,1974-cols 180-20] in Tamilnadu. Then why can’t the U.P.A government remove Then what happened to the traditional rights of the In- - While answering a question in the parliament raised theance? ban through which the fulfillment of traditional rights of dian fishermen over Katchateevu? the Indian fisherman over Katchateevu has been kept in abey by Shri. P.Kumaraswamy A.I.A.D.M.K., M.P. during the year It is to be noted that after 19th may 2009 more than 30

has stated as follows . If the U.P.A government had already removed the ban Soon 2002,the external affairs state minister Mr.Omar Abdullah Shri. Omar.Abdullah : The agreement between India no of Indian fishermen were killed by Srilankan navy till date.- and Srilanka on the boundary in historic waters between erman would have been saved. Hence the U.P.A government the two countries was signed in june 1974. The agree- after 19th may 2009 more than 30 no of lives of Indian fish ment states that Indian Fishermen and pilgrims will en- should be held responsible for the killing of more than 30 no joy acess to visit Katcha Teevu as heitherto and will not particularly Shri.S.M.Krishna minister of external affairs be required by srilanka to obtain travel documents or vi- resign otherwise he should be removed from the cabinet. sas for these purposes. of fishermen by the Srilankan navy. Shri S.M.Krishna should INDIAN STAND : Fulfillment of these traditional rights has been in abeyance since 1983 due to the security situation in the Now, it has become necessary to scrutinize the 1976 palk strait. The matters remains under discussion be- agreement again in which the foreign secretaries of both tween the two governments. countries signed. We have already seen that in no way 1976 - Again the same minister while answering a question - raised by same member stated as follows. tionalagreement rights affected has been inthe abeyance traditional since rights 1983 ofdue the to security Indian fish ermen over the Katchatheevu but fulfillment of these tradi 20 21 situation in the palk straits. This is the very very crystal clear Srilanka has taken hostile stand against India and Indian Fish- stand of India. ermen. SRILANKAN STAND : Katchatheevu is now being used as Naval Base for the But Mr. W.T.Jayasinghe foreign secretary of Srilanka joint exercise of Srilanka and China. India is facing a clear (1972-1989) who has signed in the 1976 Agreement, in his danger at present. India may assume and exercise its sover- book “Katchatheevu and Maritime Boundary of Srilanka” eignty over Katchatheevu. There is no legal bar either in the published in 2008 has stated as follows. constitution of India or in international law. What is needed is the POLITICAL WILL to exercise sovereignty over Katchatheevu. “As per the terms of the 1976 Agreement between the Katchatheevu is an Indian Territory. India may go ahead and foreign secretaries of India and Srilanka the Indian Fisher- get back Katchatheevu.” men and pilgrims would not enjoy to visit Katchatheevu as heither to”. So, the U.P.A Government can very well abrogate the 1974 and 1976 agreements by making a resolution at their What a quite contrary stand of Srilanka Government cabinet level and get back Katchatheevu and the seas in be- against the Indian Government stand which was again and tween India and Srilanka under the sovereignty of India not again expressed in the parliament of India that the fulfill- only to save the lives of Indian Fishermen but also to safe- ment of the Traditional rights of Indian Fishermen over guard the sovereignty, safety and unity of India. Katchatheevu has been in abeyance since 1983 due the security situation in the palk straits. Any more delay on the part of the U.P.A. Government in this regard will lead to the continuance of the untold in- The misinterpretation made by the Srilankan For- humane torture and killings of Indian Fishermen by the Sri- eign secretary about the terms of the 1976 agreement lankan Navy. alone is enough for the Indian Government to abrogate the 1976 Agreement without anymore delay. Now let us again come to the 1974 Agreement before conclude this chapter. Prof S. Krishnaswamy has clearly and rightly stated in his book “Katchatheevu-sovereignty of India” as follows. Katchatheevu was an Indian Territory. It was ceded to Sri- lanka by the 1974 agreement. The ceding of the Katchatheevu by India to Srilanka in 1974 was not approved by parliament. A law enacted by Parliament under article 368 was necessary for ceding Katchatheevu to Srilanka. No law was passed. India’s sovereignty on Katchatheevu has not been termi- nated leagally. The ceding of Katchatheevu to Srilanka is not complete. Further there are change of vital circumstances. Now

22 23 ATROCITIES FACED BY TAMILNADU FISHERMEN 18. Hitting hard with the Gun bud. AT THE HANDS OF SRI LANKAN NAVY

19. Drowning the fishermen in sea. Sri Lankan Navy, the torturous acts and atrocities commit- in Sri Lankan Jails. ted onIn them the event by the of Srithe Lankan Tamil fishermen Navy cannot being be caught described by the in 20. Arresting the fishermen and detaining them illegally words. To spell out is shameful, but to suppress it is deceitful. 1. Undressing our Fishermen. by the Sri Lankan Navy. Retrieving Katchatheevu Island is the 2. Firing at and mercilessly shooting down the Fisher- Theseonly solution are some to ofput the an atrocities end to these committed atrocities. on our fishermen men, even after they surrended by raising their arms in the air. 3. Forcing them to lie over Ice bars. 4. Forcing them to carry Ice bars on their heads. 5. Compelling them to lie knee down on Salt corns. 6. Forcing them to eat Masala Powder mixing it with Grease Oil.

8. Compelling homosexuality, irrespective of whether 7. Forcing them to intercourse with a dead Tirukai fish.

9. Spitting over their faces. the fishermen are father or son or brothers. 10. Compelling them to drink Urine. TORTURE Torture seeks to annihilate the victims personality and coward Tamils. 11. Castigating the fishermen as Indian Bastards and denies the inherent dignity of the human beeing Sea. Torture is a crime under International law which means 12. Pushing the physically challenged fishermen into that it is binding on every member of the international

14. Destroying nets worth several lakhs. international treaties in which torture is expressly prohibited. 13. Forcibly taking away the catched fishes. 15. Forcibly snatching away gold rings, chains, cell Thecommunity, systematic regardless or wide spread of whether practice aof statetorture has constitutes ratified a crime against humanity Secretary - General Banki-moon phones and money owned by fishermen. message for the International Day in support of victims of Torture 2010 16. Threatening the fishermen with acid bottles. 17. Hitting and stamping24 the fishermen with boot legs. 25 WITNESS TESTIMONY OF TWO bullet hit me on the right side of my head near the rear side TAMILNADU FISHERMEN Sriof myLankan left head,Naval resultingboats, firing in indiscriminatelyfracture of my nose, on us. backbone The first Having ceded Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka, our and upper jaw. Bullet pellets pierced my right shoulder, right thigh and on the right side of my body. Within seconds after Goons. The following is a tearful testimony narrated by two Tamilnadu fishermen are facing the wrath of the Sinhala to Thanjavur Hospital, where I was operated upon and bullets by the Sri Lankan Navy. firingand pellets on us were the Sri removed Lankan from Navy my disappeared. body. Still I haveI was bullets brought in Tamilnadu fishermen about the atrocities committed on them Testimony -1: my brain and Doctors fear that any attempt to remove them will be fatal to me. Now I could hear nothing. I have become Oral Testimony of C.Soundar Rajan, (25 years as on deaf. My right hand and leg has become permanently para- - lyzed. Still I could not breath through my nose and I could duchery, State. breath only through by mouth. In short I am a living dead. 2009) fishermen, resident of Mandapagathur, Karaikal, Pu On 26.10.2006, along with my father Chinnappa and Testimony-2 : brother Chandrasekar, I ventured out into the Sea near Jag- athapattinam in Pudukottai District. We were in possession Oral Testimony of K.Sekar (aged 45 years, as of 2009) permanent resident of Arcot Thurai, Taluk, . of fishing pass issued by the Tamilnadu Government and we were fishing on the side of Mallipattinam within the Indian territory. Suddenly, there appeared a flotilla more than ten

26 27 THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS - TUESDAY, APRIL 12 / 2011 - / CHENNAI We four of us were fishing near Kodiyakarai. As it is criminately. Arumugam who accompanied me was got a bul- KILLING TO AVENGE LANKA’S WC LOSS” lettheir struck usual on practice, his right thigh. the Sri Five Lankan bullets Navy pierced came my firing right indishand BARELY two weeks after Congress leader Sonia Gandhi above the elbow, as though my right hand had been forcibly ‘promised’ that there would be no more at¬tacks on Tamil Nadu cut. Due to this blood profused badly. Having no other option, fish¬ermen by the Lankan Navy reports on Monday emerged that Lanka’s Navy allegedly killed four Rameswaram fishermen, missing since April 2. butdays to with bear severe with injuries,the tragedy, my right I remained hand got floating decayed. in Ithe had Sea no “Our sources across the Palk Strait confirmed that it was forother three option days. but Having to amputate remained my floatingright hand in the on Seamy forown three and brutal retaliation on innocent Tamil fishermen by Lankan throw it into the Sea. Navy, dejected over their nation’s defeat in the Cricket World These are scenes which are not witnessed even in Cine- Cup final against India,” Seethayin Maindan, coordinator of mas, These two events took place within the territorial waters Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement, told Express. Post 1983, it of India. Since 1983, thousands of similar attacks have taken was a regular phenomenon that when-ever Lanka lost a match against India or if India won matches against Paki¬stan or a Navy and Indian Coast Guard went missing when these at- nation friendly to Lanka, innocent persons fishing in placetacks tookagainst place? our innocent fishermen. Where did our Indian were targeted, he added. Victus, Anthony raj, Johnpaul and Ma- rimuthu - were missing on April 2 after they went fishing near SRI LANKANS RECENT CHALLENGE TO INDIA Katchatheevu, close to the Lankan mari¬time boundary. Whenever India played Cricket match with Srilanka Meanwhile, a report from Palk Strait said that three bod- the Tamil Fishermen of India used to pray that India should ies were washed ashore near the Jaffna coastline and one of loose the match because if India won the match the very next them was identified to be of Victus, who went missing on April 2. minute the Srilankan navy would enter in to our territory and “We strongly feel that these fishermen might have been killed by the Lankans, as Victus’s body had cut marks,” Seethayin Main- While the whole Tamil Nadu was busy in the 2011 dan said. His body had 15 cut injuries and a few of them were start attack on our fishermen. Assembly Elections, the Srilankan Navy abducted Four quite deep, including one in his forehead, said sources. The the- ory gained ground as his body was not allowed to be sent back - for final rites and was hurriedly buried in Jaffna. nally killed them and threw away their bodies one by one in Rameswaram Fishermen and cruely tortured them and fi THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS - WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13th – 2011 - CHENNAI THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS (Daily) has clearly reported different parts of palk straits. What is the reason? INJURY MAKRS ON FISHER’S BODY POINT TO TOR- the Matter in its Chennai edition on April 12th & April 13th of TURE: AUTOPSY DOC : 2011 as follows THE post-mortem report of one of -the fishermen, whose body was found in Sri Lanka, points to the fact that he was

28 29 tortured to death. According to a doctor, who conducted the KATCHATHEEVU IS OURS autopsy and talked to this reporter over phone, there were injury marks that raised suspicion over the death of the fisher. CONCRETE EVDIENCES This statement is inconsis¬tent with the statement is¬sued Even during the reign of ancient Tamil Sangam Kings, by both Sri Lankan and the Indian governments that they were reign of King Sethupathy of Ramanathapuram, reign of East drowned. lndia_Cpmpany, during the time of direct British rule and even after independence, Katchatheevu island remained with The four fishermen - Victus, Antony, John Paul and Mu- Tamilnadu. There are many more plentiful evidence and data niasamy - had set out on April 2 but failed to return. On April 7, there was a report that two unidentified bodies had washed rich Sea belong to Tamilnadu. ashore in Neduthivu in Jaffna. to establishEVIDENCES that Katchatheevu : Island and the surround fish After a demonstration by the relatives of one of the victim, 1. During A.D. 1605, the clan of Ramanathapuram Seth- the government agreed to send them to Jaffna to identify the upathy King was established by the Madurai Nayaks, incorpo- bodies. The body of the one of the fishermen Victus was identi- rating 69 coastal villages and 7 Islands, of which Katchathee- fied by his relatives. vu Island is one of the Island. On April 9, at 2.30 pm, a doctors’ team headed by Dr. 2. A copper plate plaque issued by King Koothan Seth- S.Rooban carried out the post¬mortem at a hospital in Jaff¬na upathy who ruled Ramanathapuram during the years 1622- in the presence of a local minister, superintendent of police and 1635, depicts that the Sea upto Talaimannar belonged to Set- the representa¬tives from Rameswaram. hupathy Kings. Later, the body was handed over to the relatives for his last rites to be done at Jaffna itself. Valar Kathali Ammai of Rameswaram are grown in Katchathee- 3. Coronation flowers which adorn the Goddess, Malai A highly-placed source who was present during the au- vu Island. Similarly, cattle’s that are donated to the Temple are cared for in Katchatheevu Island and the Milk and other topsy said that the post¬mortem revealed that a bro¬ken pin items needed for pooja are brought only from Katchatheevu was found stuck in the big toe of the victus’ left leg that showed island. that he could have been tortured to death. 4. In the Kingdom of Ramanathapuram, there existed a A few other injuries on the right shoulder and on his back separate account section to maintain and audit the accounts further increased sus¬picion that it was a brutal attack oil him. of Kathatheevu Island. The report also found that the shirt was torn and buttons bro- 5. In the plaque issued to Jamindarine Mangaleswari ken. Natchiyar, who took over after the period of Ramanathapuram S.M.Krishna always says that Srilanka is our friendly na- King Muthuramalinga Sethupathy (who was imprisoned for tion. Then who are Tamil Fishermen, Tamils and Tamil Nadu to a long period for having opposed the British), it is clearly him? mentioned that Katchatheevu Island belonged to Ramana- thapuram Zamin. 6. There is a clear document evidencing leasing out Katchatheevu Island to East India Company by Ramana-

30 31 thapuram Sethupathy in the year 1822. clause was incorporated to permit ail those residing Ramana- 7. In Queen Victoria’s 1858 Proclamation whereby the thapuram Zamin can always visit Katchtheevu Island. powers got transferred to British Rule from East India Com- 12. Baskara Sethypathy of Ramanathapuram, has as- pany, reference is made that Katchatheevu Island belong to signed a portion of Katchatheevu island to Poet Sundaram. Ramanathapuram Zamin. 13. When Zamindari Abolition Act came into force, 8. P.P.Peris, who during the years of British Rule in 1936- Katchatheevu Island is mentioned as 285 Acres of Govern- 40, served as an Assistant Draftsman and later became a Min- ment Poromboke land in Ramanathapuram Village. isterial Secretary after Sri Lanka attained independence, on 14. In the Ramanathpuram Gazetteer, issued by

Katchatheevu Island belonged to Ramanathapuram Kings. He Tamiinadu was called Madras) on 11.11.1958, in Register 08.05.1966,says, “During made the years the following1936-40, statement,when I served confirming as Assistant that No.68,S.A.Viswanathan, Katchatheevu Assistant Island Revenue is shown Officer, as comprised Madras in (then Ra- Draftsman in the Land Survey Department, I was directed to manathapuram Village. survey the district boundaries of Ceylon. Therefore, I perused 15. On 01.07.1913, when few Islands were taken on a all records, documents, historical evidences and the Queen 15 year lease by the Government of from Victoria’s proclamation, by which 1 found that Katchatheevu Ramanathapuram Sethupathy, Katchatheevu Island is men- Island belonged to King Sethupathy, Therefore I drew the tioned by the Secretary to Government, as a territory belong- Northern District of Ceylon delineating Katchatheevu Island.” ing to Ramanathapuram Zamin and situate on the North East This statement issued by the Ministerial Secretary on of Ramanathapuram. 08.05.1966, was widely reported in the then Daily Mirror 16. In the year 1947, one K.M.Mohammed Merasa Mara- published from Sri Lanka and thereafter reported in Indian kayar, took the Katchatheevu Island on lease from Ramana- Express in India. thapuram Sethupathy. In the documents which was then 9. There is a Registered Document (Registration No. executed, Katchatheevu Island was shown as a territory situ- 510/1880, Book 1, Volume 16) evidencing the fact that on ated between Talaimannar and Danuskodi and belonging to 23.06.1880, eight coastal villages and four Island, including Ramanathapuram Suzerainty. the Katchatheevu Island, belong to the Ramanathapuram Set- 17. In the Land Document Register issued by the Gov- hupathy’s were given in lease by the District Collector, Ma- durai jointly to one Abdul Kadar Marakayar and Muthusamy and issued as an updated publication, in the year 1966, at Pillai. pageernment, 107, firstlyKatchatheevu issued in Island the year is mentioned 1957 and as again a uninhabited reprinted 10. By a document dt.04.02.1885 (Registration No. territory belonging to Danuskodi. 134/1885), Muthusamy Pillai, has taken the Katchatheevu Is- 18. Between the years 1913 and 1928, many Islands land on an annual lease of Rs.15 per annum from the Estate including the Katchatheevu Island were taken on lease from Manager of Ramanathapuram Sethupathy for the purpose of Ramanathapuram Sethupathy Kings and were again sublet to procuring dye roots. 11. Under a pact entered into between the Dutch and 19. On several occasion the Sethupathy Kings, have Ramanathapuram Seethupathy during the year 1767, a fishermen.themselves directly leased out many islands including the

32 33 THE DICTATORIAL ACT OF THE

Katchatheevusuch leases. Island to fishermen. There are records to show CONGRESS AND THE LOSS OF that fishermen20. In all the from Indian Tondi Land and Survey Nambuthazhai Records issued have between taken KATCHATHEEVU ISLAND the years 1874 and 1956, Katchatheevu Island is depicted as an Indian Territory alone. The Indian Land Survey Depart- which have formulated a Constituion to protect the interest of ment has mentioned Katchatheevu Island as, measuring 285 each andIndia every is a citizen.country It with is no different less an act rationalities of betrayal, andpeople anti of Acres and 20 cents comprised in Survey No.1250, national, when a territory belonging to people of a particu- 21. In all reports published in several medias, Katcha lar nationality being ceded to a foreign power, that too with- theevu Island is mentioned as belonging to Ramanathapuram out obtaining the consent of that people. This could be sum- Sethupathy. marized as a dictatorial act. Katchatheevu Island was ceded Thus it is very clear that Katchatheevu Island is a Tamil to Sri Lanka by the then Congress Government through the Soil, and it is a Tamil Land. Katchatheevu Island and the seas surrounding it belonged to Tamils through several genera- by the Indian parliament. 1974 Traditionallyagreement, which Katchatheevu agreement Island had not had even been been the ratified terri- which enjoyed the land over the years. tory of Tamils. The foregoing chapters dealt in detail the Tam- tions.It More is this particularly, ancestral it Tamil is the home tamil landfishermen which community was ceded ils traditional right over Katchatheevu Island. The Sinhalese to Sri Lanka by Indira Gandhi in the year 1974. While gift- were often found staking a claim over Katchatheevu Island. ing away the land, Indira Gandhi pointed out that Katchathee- During 1920, the Sinhalese made a claim with the British rul- vu Island is being ceded not on the basis of records but for ers over the Katchatheevu Island. Even then Katchatheevu Is- other political reasons. What ever be the reason for ceding land continued to remain a territory of Tamils. After independence, during 1951 and again in 1954, womenfolk numbering above 500 who were widowed by the Sri Lanka laid a claim over Katchatheevu Island. Dudly Se- Sinhalathe Katchatheevu Navy Goons, Island, Retrieval but it of is Katchatheevuultimately our Island, Tamil fisheralone nanayake and John Kothalawala were the Srilankan Prime Ministers, and Jawahariai Nehur was the then Indian Prime Minister. Jawaharlal Nehru did not show any interest will put an end to the suffering of our fisher brethren.

34 35 over Katchatheevu Island. This emboldened the Sri Lankans It is widely reported that after the 1971 Indo Pak War, to conduct a Military exercise in Katchatheevu Island in 1955. Pakistan sought to establish an Air base in Sri Lanka and this When this was raised in Parliament, Jawahariai Nehru would was vehemently opposed by India. On its part Sri Lanka de- only say that the issue is being analyzed. In the mean time Sri manded that, to keep Pakistan in bay, Katchatheevu Island - be ceded to it. Mrs. land and announced “postponement of military exercises” till Indira Gandhi is Lankathen. agreed to wait for a final decision on Katchatheevu Is reported to have Again during 1968 the issue on Katchatheevu Island accepted to this was raised in Parliament. Mrs.lndira Gandhi, the then Prime barter. This is the Minister, following the footsteps of her father Jawahariai political reason Nehru did not pay much attention and replied that she is that is widely re- awaiting details on Katchatheevu Island from the Govern- ported to be the ment of Tamilnadu. During the same period, on 02.03.1968, reason for ceding the Samyuktha Socialist Part, which had only 2 members in Katchatheevu Is- the Tarnilnadu assembly moved an adjournment motion on land to Sri Lanka. the issue of Katchatheevu Island, Pulavar Govindan, the then Considering the stature of Mrs.Indira Gandhi and the political Deputy Speaker, (who was then in Chiar) said that the issue power which she wielded during that time, Mrs, Indiara Gan- - dhi was in the height of her political career and it in the next dressed by the Central Government. The DMK had 138 mem- year viz., 1975 she declared Emergency, it is rather doubtful bersof Katchatheevu in the Assembly Island at that is an time. external This is affairs the manner issue into which be ad whether Mrs.Indira Gandhi would have yielded to the dictates the DMK, once a patriarch of separate Dravidian land, viewed of Mrs.Bandaranayake. the issue of Katchatheevu Island. Mrs.Bandaranayake is considered very close to the In 1974, the Prime Ministers of both the nations Nehru family. Even during the days of Mr.Bandaranayake, deliberated on handing over Katchatheevu Island to there was close relation- Sri Lanka. On 26.06.1974, Mrs.Bandaranayke, signed the ship between Jawaha- agreement in Colombo and on 28.06.1974. Mrs. Indira rlal Nehru family and Gandhi signed the fateful agreement. On 23.07.1974 a Bandaranayake fam- report on this agreement was read over in the Parliament. Till ily. After, the death of Mr.Bandaranayake, Mrs. Mrs. Indira Gandhi, fairly admitted that Katchatheevu Island Bandaranayake became wasdate cededthe agreement for political has not reasons been andratified not by on the documentary parliament. the Prime Minister of evidences. It is worth mentioning that during the Indo China Sri Lanka. She had the War and Indo Pak war, Sri Lanka had always supported China distinction of being and Pakistan. In reciprocation of Sri Lanka’s support during the Bangladesh War, Pakistan gave two planes to Sri Lanka. Minister in the World. The relationship between her and the first Women Prime 36 37 Nehru continued well, till the death of Jawaharlal Nehru. KATCHATHEEVU Thereafter, the relationship continued with Mrs.Indira Gandhi. Although, Mrs.Bandaranayake had the distinction of being AND THE INDIAN TAMILS OF SRILANKA fading away at home. So there was a necessity to rejuvenate, whichthe World’s was accomplishedfirst Women Prime by ceding Minister, Katchatheevu she saw her Island power to The Congress Rulers never considered Tamils as In- dians and Tamil Nadu a part of India. Ten Years earlier to Sri Lanka. While, Mrs. Indira Gandhi weighed the family rela- the Indira Gandhi – Srimavo traitorous agreement of 1974, tionship more, she failed to realize the trouble ahead for the during the year 1964, Sastri the then Prime Minister of In- Tamil Indian Fishermen. In the end, Katchatheevu Island was dia Made a betrayal agreement with the same lady Srimavo ceded to satisfy personal desires. Pandaranaike which made lakhs and lakhs of Indian Tamils of Srilanka Stateless. These Tamils were taken to Ceylon un- der the protective umbrella of British since 19th Century and “Katchatheevu was the most typical case of a personal they formed a bulk labour which turned the malaria infested equation playing the role of diplomacy. When the negotia- forests of Srilanka in to a smiling plantations of tea which sus- tions had virtually failed, and the Indian official delegation tained the Srilankan economy up to modern times. was pressurizing Indra Gandhi not to give up India’s claim Under the British Rule these Indian Tamils of Srilanka on the islet, Srimavo Bandaranaika made a personal appeal enjoyed the same legal status what the Singhalese and the to Indira Gandhi to come to her rescue as it would otherwise Srilankan Tamils enjoyed. After Independence, the Srilankan spell political disaster for her. Indira Gandhi appreciated Government declared that all the Srilankan Indian Tamils are Mrs. Srimao Bandaranaike’s predicament and manipulated stateless by passing an act by name The Ceylon Citizenship the situation in such a way that it became a fait accompli Act 1948. even before the Indian delegation could react. Srimavo Ban- Instead of warning the Srilankan Government to with- daranaike remembered this gesture as late as 1990 with im- draw the above act, the Congress Government went on nego- mense gratitude. Prof. Partha Gosh in his book “Ethnicity versus to get 5-25 lakhs of Srilankan Indian Tamils back to India out Nationalism. tiatingof 9.75 withlakhs Srilanka of Indian on Tamils this issue in Srilanka. and finally It is toSastri be noted accepted that 90% of them did not want to return to India because they had been there in Srilanka Since 19th Century.

38 39 At that time Shir. C. Raja Gopalachari, once a Prominent Details of the Debate and events taken leader of congress Party righty echoed the feelings of Tamils as follows. place on 23.07.1974 about the 1974 “Why should nearly a million of children and grand Agreement in the parliament. children born in Ceylon to parents who toiled and sweated for Cey- Mr. SPEAKER: Now, Shri Swaran Singh will make a state- lon and who had gone there from ment..... and settled down in the SHR1 MADHU L1MAYE (Banka) : On a point of order. 1 plantations be disentitled to be citi- had already given you notice, zens of Ceylon? Why should a single child born in Ceylon and desiring to SHRI K. MANOHARAN (Madras North): Each Member be in Ceylon and be a working citi- must be given a proper opportunity to express his views. zen thereof be turned to wander as SHRI SEZHIYAN (Kumbakonam): Before the Hon. homeless refugees in India?” Minister makes his statement, I want to submit that we As usual the congress Rulers ig- should have been consulted and the House should have nored all objections and protests. Ultimately lakhs and lakhs - joined families of Indian Tamils in Srilanka departed each holy agreement for the surrender of territory by India. While family in to two or more and 60% of them were forced to re- webeen are taken anxious into that confidence friendly andbefore cordial they enteredrelations into should this unbe turn to India as refugees. maintained with Sri Lanka, the legal and constitutional pro- Thereafter, the Srilankan Tamil refugees in India and prieties against the interests of the country since it amounts their blood relations in Srilanka used to meet and recall their to pure surrender of our territory without going through any memories once in a year at Katchatheevu during the “Antoniar of the norms. This is an unholy and disgraceful act of states- Festival” without Visa or any other travel documents. After manship unworthy of any Government. Therefore, We do not Indira Gandhi gifted Katchatheevu to Srimavo for the reasons want to associate ourselves with the statement that is going described in the previous chapters the Srilankan Government once for all locked the Antoniar Temple and stopped the An- to be made by the Hon. Minister, and we want to disassociate toniar Festival Since 1978 and detained the Pilgrims to visit ourselves by walking out of the House. katchatheevu. SHRI K. MANOHARN : Please allow one Member from Thus the meeting opportunity of the Srilankan Tamil each party to express his views. We have decided to stage a Refugees in India and the Indian Tamils in Srilanka once in walk-out, and therefore, before we walk out we want to tell a year at Katchatheevu was buried because of the ceding of you the reasons which have prompted us to walk out. Katchatheevu to Srilanka through the traitorous, betrayal and unpatriotic agreement made by Indira Gandhi during the year The agreement entered into between Sri Lanka Govern- 1974. ment and the Government of India is anti-national and unpa- What remarkable here is that Shri. K. Kamaraj the triotic; it is the worst agreement ever signed by any civilised Then All India Congress party leader who made Sastri as country of the world. 1 do not like to insult or hurt the feel- Prime Minister after Nehru and Indira as the Prime Min- ings of either the people of Sri Lanka or the Prime Minister of ister after Sastri is a Tamil. Sri Lanka....

40 41 MR. SPEAKER : Hon. Members are going to have a de- is a shame on the part of the Government that they have not consulted the people of the place and the Chief Minister of the SHRI K. MANOHARAN ; I must be permitted to speak State. We condemn this action of Government and along with bate on , foreign affairs when they can raise all these points. now. Through this unholy agreement, the Sri Lanka Prime my friends, 1 also walk out in protest. Minister has emerged as victor and the Prime Minister of In- dia as a pathetic vanquished. It is an assault on the integrity the House). (ShriP.K.N.Thevar and Shri Muhanimed Sheriff then left of the country. In view of this, we have decided to stage a walk SHRI P.K. DEO (Kalahandi): On a point of order, Sir. The out and we are walking out. statement that the Foreign Minister is going to make deals SHRIP.K.N.THEVER (Ramanathapuram) : Kachchativu with cession of Indian territory, in this regard, two important forms part of my constituency. You are acting like a dicta- - tor. You arc speaking like a democrat but at the same time ticle of the Constitution says: issues are involved. The first is the constitutional issue. Ar you are acting like a dictator. The whole life of thousands of “The territory of India shall comprise

forces, their military towards that island. Thousands of a. the territories of the States; fishermen.....mechanised boats Today were the stopped;Ceylon government movements has were moved restricted. their Their lives are in danger. You have simply betrayed. You have and b. the Union Territories specified in the First Schedule; no sympathy and courtesy to consult those people. You are c. such other territories as may be acquired”. thinking of it as a part of Tamil Nadu. Do not think it as part So, further acquisiton of territory can be accepted, but of Tamil Nadu. It is going to be the base for a torture war. It is nowhere does the Constitution provide for cession of even going to be the base and challenge the life of the nation. I have an inch of Indian territory- The Kachchativu controversy was to warn all these things because in the past it has been the raised only a few years ago by the Ceylonese Government tradition of our Governemnt to give bhoodan of the northern when the Bandaranaike Minister came into power. All the rev- borders. (Interruptions) enue records of the Madras Government corrobo¬rate that Mr. SPEAKER: Kindly sit down Kachchativu was a part of the former Ramnad Zamindary and SHRI P.K.N.THEVAR : The division of India has cost the an integral part of this country. So, under no circumstances life of Mahatama Gandhi. It is not a part of Tamil Nadu but it is the Government has got any power under the Constitution to a part of the holy land of India. You are betraying. On behalf of cede even an inch of our country. the constituency and on behalf of the Forward Block, 1 walk ……………………………… out. ……………………………… SHRI MUHAMMED SHERIFF (Periakulam): Even on the Sir they cannot consider this country as the zamindari of the congress party. A few days back the Coco Island, which show that Kachchativu belongs to the Raja of Ramnad. Gov- is party of the Andaman group of islands, was ceded to Burma. 1sternment April 1965, has failed 1 produced to go through sufficient those records records. in this 1 House was the to The question of Beru Bari was raised by the previous speak- elected representative of that constituency here previously. It er. Now has come the question of Kachchativu. If we go on

42 43 ceding our territory like this, what will be left of this THE MINISTER OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (SHRI SWARAN country? SINGH) : Over the years, since our independence, there have Secondly, it is utter contempt and disrespect shown to been a number of questions and discussions in the House re- garding the Island of Kachchativu. Government have of course us with a fait accompli. The shutting out of the views of the fully shared this interest and concern for arriving at an early thisopposition House byparties not taking in this the manner House is into most confidence anti-democratic. and facing So, and amicable solution of this long-outstanding matter; and I 1 would say that the statement which is going to be laid on the am happy to say that an agreement was signed between the Table of the Lok Sabha is not worth the paper on which it has two Prime Minister on 28th June, a copy of which I am laying been typed. Therefore, I would submit that the External Af- on the table of the House. fairs Minister should consider these matters and should not The Island of Kachchativu, about 3/4 of a square mile in lay the statement on the Table of the House. Otherwise, we extent, is situated in the Palk Bay; it is about 10 1/2 miles for will be forced to take the extreme step of walking out. the nearest landfall in Sri Lanka and about 12 1/2 miles from SHRI SEZH1YAN : But the agreement is unconstitu the nearest Indian shore. The Palk Bay, which constitutes his- tional. toric waters of Indian and Sri Lanka, is some 18 miles wide at its entrance through the Paik Straits, and has an average MR. SPEAKER :How can we know it? width of some 28 miles. SHRI ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE: It is published in news- The issue of deciding Indian and Sri Lanka claims to papers. Kachchativu was closely connected with determining the MR. SPEAKER: How can the house be seized of the mat- boundary line between India and Sri lanka in the waters of ter unless the Minister makes a statement? the Palk Bay. The entire quetion of the maritime boundary in SHRI ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE: Can they violate the Con- the historic waters of the Palk Bay required urgently to be stitution? settled, keeping in view the claims of the two sides, histori- cal evidence, legal practice and precedent and in the broader MR. SPEAKER : I have given the ruling, the Minister. context of our growing friendly relations with Sri Lanka. (At this stage Shri Kachwai tore up some papaers and Kachchativu has always been an uninhabited island. threw them away). Neither Sri Lanka nor India has had any permanent presence (Some Hon. Members left the House at the stage). there. During the long colonial period the question whether SHRI K. LANKAPPA : Sir the tearing of papers by an Hon. Kachchativu was part of India or part of Ceylon was frequent- Member is contempt of the House. I want your ruling on this. ly discussed, with the Government of the day putting, forward ……………………. claims and counter claims, in recent years, both countries had agreed that there should be no unilateral action which would ……………………. seek to change the undetermined status of Kachchativu pend- MR, SPEAKER: My ruling is that tearing of papers is not in keeping with the decorum or dignity of the House. ing a final solution to be reached through amicable bilateral efforts. 44 45 ………………………… Agreement demarcating the maritime boundary in the Palk ………………………… Bay, will be considered as fair, just and equitable to both coun- tries. At the same time, I wish to remind the Hon’ble Members I would particularly like to draw the attention of Hon- - ourable Memebers to the fact that when two sides have a grimage and navigation, which is a victory of mature statern- good arguable case on a particular issue, and the problem thatanship, in a concluding victory in the this cause Agreement of friendship the rights and cooperation of fishing, pil in cannot be resolved expeditiousiy through bilateral negotia- the area. A potential major irritant in relations between the tions, there is inevitably an attempt to seek outside interven- two countries, which had remained unresolved over the years, tion by appeal either to the International Court of Justice or has now been removed, and both countries can now concen- to third party arbitration. For our part, we have always been trate on the exploitation of economic and other resources in - ing countries, we should seek to resolve them through bilat- - firmly of the view that in any differences with our neighbour eral discussions without outside interference, on the basis of mentthese, marksnow well-defined, an important waters step andin further generally strengthening on intensifying the equality and good will. It is a matter of satisfaction to us that closecooperation ties that between bind India themselves and Sri Lanka. in various fields. The Agree our Prime Minister’s resolve to settle this issue through di- rect bilateral talks met with an equaly warm response from (The provisions of the Agreement are given in the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, and the agreement could be Appendix I). reached in an atmosphere of friendship and mutual under- SHR1 M. KALYANASUNDARAM (Tiruchirapalli) : Sir, standing. while my party welcomes the Agreements reached between Exhaustive research of Historical and other records was Sri Lanka and India, there are problems to come up during the made by our experts on Kachchativu and every available piece implementation of the Agreement. So far, our fishermen had a as in Tamil Nadu, Goa and Bombay, as well as abroad in Brit- Hon. Minister says that these rights are fully protected. But right to go even beyond Kachchativu, fish and come back. The ishof evidence and Dutch collected archives. from An various intensive record examination offices in of India, evidence such there are problems which we would like our Government to and exchange of views took place, specially during the past take up with Sri Lanka and seek their discussion on this state- ment, I have given notice of a motion. I would request you to question of Kachchativu, for the reasons I have just explained, allow a discussion on that. year,had necessarily between senior to be officialsdealt with of asthe part two of Governments. the broader quesThis- tion of the boundary in the Palk Bay so as to eliminate the coming up next week. MR. SPEAKER: The general debate on foreign affairs is possibility of any further disputes on similar matters in these SHRI DINEN BHATTACHARYA (Serampore) : 1 want to historic waters. On the basis of dispassionate examination of the histori- Kachchativu has always been an uninhabited island. But an cal records and other evidence, and keeping in mind the legal Hseekon. oneMember clarification. had said In that the it statement was within he his has constituency. metioned that If principles and also keeping in mind our policy and principle that is so. I do not know how it could be said that it has not been inhabited by any human being. How could it then be a part of his constituency? of peaceful settlement of disputes, I feel confident that the 46 47 SHRI M. KALYANASUNDARAM : The Tamil Nadu Govern- KARUNANIDHI ment has a grievance that it has not been consulted properly. May I know what is the actual fact in regard to that? I also AND KATCHATHEEVU ISLAND want to know the details about the protection given with re- Mr. M.Karunanidhi was the Chief Minister of Tamil- SHRI SWARAN SINGH:The Hon Member would no doubt nadu, when Katchatheevu gard to fishing rights. be aware that in the year 1921 when both Sri Lanka and In- Island was ceded to Sri Lan- ka by Mrs. Indira Gandhi. the British Governement because they had control over both Mr.Karunanidhi referred the Sridia Lankawere under as weli British as India. rule, 1 fishery am sure line that had the been Hon, decided Member by matter to the Madras Law College and awaited an ex- three or three and a half miles west of the Kachchativu. That pert opinion on the status knows that the 1921 fishery line was aline which was about of Katchatheevu Island. Pro- fessor Mr.Krishnasamy, who is, to the western side of the fishery line was the exclusive is also a Lawyer, submitted fishery right of the Indian citizens and to the east of that was his report to the Chief Minis- Kachchativuthe right of Sri and Lanka they fishermen. also used But the in Kachchativu spite of that island division, for ter, in which he categorically thedrying fishermen their nets. generally As would were be knownfree to to fish the even House round there about is no held that Katchatheevu Is- fresh water available there. Mostly they used it for spreading land belongs to India and it is a territory of the Indian Union. their nets and trying to dry the nets, etc., He further held that the stake over Katchatheevu Island can be established even before an International Court, The re- About the traditional rights, if the Hon. Members goes port was submitted in December, 1973. Accepting the report through the terms of the Agreement, a copy of which has been Mr.Karunanidhi declared in the state assembly, that what is placed on the Table of the House, he will get the answer be- stated in the report is the stand cause it is mentioned there that, although Sri Lanka’s claim to of the Tamilnadu Government. sovereignty over Kachchativu has been recognised, the tra- In spite of Mr.Karunanidhi’s ditional navigation rights exercised by India and Sri Lanka in objection and the objections

MR. SPEAKER: Later on we may have debate on this, but each other’s water will remain unaffected (interruption). Gandhi proceeded with her de- now 1 am not allowing any more. raisedcision to by part officials, with Katchathee Mrs.Indira- MR. KUREEL. vu Island. It can be concluded Source: Lok sabha Debates, July 23,1974, Cols. 186-201. that Katchatheevu Island was not ceded to Sri Lanka, but was gifted to Sri Lanka by Mrs.In- dira Gandhi.

48 49 Although, Mr.Karunanidhi objected to ceding the silence and Katchatheevu island was taken away. Thereafter, Katchatheevu Island, yet he failed to pursue further. He could Mr.Karunanidhi forgot Katchatheevu Island, but only talked have moved the Supreme Court or could have urged the Pres- ident to seek a reference under Article 143 (1) of the Con- stitution. Given the same circumstance, Dr.P.C.Roy, a staunch outabout in thegreed fishing while rights. transcending Now he territorialhas forgotten boundaries”, even that. as He if Congressman and Chief Minister of West Bengal, vehemently hehas had gone given to the up extent all worldly of commenting wishes. that “the fishermen are opposed the Central Congress Government and secured the When the Cine Direc- right of his State. Unfortunately, Mr.Karunanidhi, failed to do tor Seeman condemned so. Whether he failed to act, or he was prevented from acting the killing of Eelam Tamils, is to be probed. Karunanidhi arrested and Professor V.Surya Narayanan, of the University of Ma- detained him under the Na- dras, who analyzed the question of Center State relations tional Security Act. When arising out of Foreign Treaties and Agreements, took the is- Seeman condemned the killing of Tamil Indian Fish- conclusions, in which the third conclusion reads thus: ermen, Karunanithi again sue of Katchatheevu Island as an example. He arrived at five The political exigencies of the time and the desire to arrested and detained him seek the congress party’s support in order to remain in under the National Secu- power made Chief Minister Karunanidhi not to resort to rity Act. In both cases, legal remedies to protect the interests of the state. Karunanidhi acted not as the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu but as the home Minister of Srilankan Government. It was during this period that Mr.M.G.Ramachandran left DMK to start his own party the AIADMK. Mr.M.G.Ramachandran, During the last regime of the UPA, Karunanidhi pledged charged Mr.Karunanidhi the lives of Eelam Tamils to avail the spectrum cash. Now, at the with a list of corruption present regime of the UPA, he is pledging the lives of Tamil Fish- and demanded dismissal of ermen to avoid the spectrum case. the Government. The Cen- During the Tamil Nady Assembly Election campaign, tral Government was then, in a Public Meeting at Chennai on 05-04-2011, Karunani- so powerful that, if decided, dhi begged Sonia Gandhi in person to take action to retrieve it could have well proceed- - ed with dissolving the As- ing so, Karunanidhi stated that the traditional rights of the sembly. Therefore, to stay TamilnaduKatchatheevu Fishermen to save the over fishermen Katchatheevu of Tamil preserved Nadu. While in 1974 do in power Mr.Karunanidhi agreement were withdrawn in the subsequent 1976 agree- required the support of ment. We have already seen that this the Srilankan Govern- the Congress. Before the ment stand and not that of India. The Indian Government agreement could be signed, the Foreign Secretary Mr.Keval - Singh, met Mr.Karunanidhi. Mr.Karunanidhi, maintained a stoic men over Katchatheevu as per the terms of 1974 agreement stand is that the fulfillment of traditional rights of the fisher 50 51 has been in abeyance since 1983 due to the security situation THE CHIEF MINISTER OF TAMIL NADU at the Palk straits. Why did then Karunanidhi express his views from the SELVI J. JAYALALITHA CAN ACHIEVE Srilankan stand instead of Indian Government stand…? Selvi J. Jayalalitha, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, if she would strive hard in the right direction, succeed in secur- The Tamil soci- ing back Katchatheevu island. Calling for abrogation she ety has taught a good lesson to Karunani- a public inter- dhi through the 2011 hadest litigation already filed be- Tamil Nady Assembly fore the supreme Elections. At least at court challenging this stage Karunani- the 1974-1976 dhi should urge the Agreements. She U.P.A. Government to should be aware convene the cabinet that “Justice De- and annul the 1974 layed is Justice and 1976 Agreements. Denied”. The issue If the U.P.A. Governe- of Katchatheevu ment hesitate or re- island could be resolved in two forums. First is the Indian Par- fuse to act, then Karunanidhi should withdraw his party’s liament and the next is the supreme court. Even after 1974 support for the U.P.A. Government. this issue had not been properly debated in our Parliament. At this juncture, the Parliament members of the D.M.K. - party should have one thing in their mind, that they have been tion during the question or zero hour and it is hurriedly dis- selected only as M.P. Candidates by their party but they have Nowcussed and citing then time the issueconstraint. of Tamil Indian fishermen finds men been elected as Parliament Members by the Tamil Nadu vot- Now in Tamil nadu this issue has assumed a prominence. ers. More over they are being paid not from their party fund All the political parties in Tamil Nadu are in favour of retriev- but from the public fund. Hence they have to be more loyal to ing Katchatheevu. the public than to their party. It is the expectation of the Tamil society of the whole world that the Parliament members of Leader of opposition of Indian Parliament, Smt. Sushma the D.M.K. party in Delhi should do their best to abrogate the Swaraj during her visit to Tamil Naady has declared that even 1974 and 1976 agreements by the U.P.A. Government for the though their B.J.P. has no M.P. in Tamil Nadu, she herself will retrieval of Katchatheevu. act as a Tamil Nady M.P in the Parliament infavour of the Indi- an Fishermen of Tamil Nadu. Since 1974, the B.J.P. is in favour of retrieving Katchatheevu. Therefore Tamilnadu Chief Minister Selvi J. Jayalalitha can very well convene a all parties meeting on this issue and

52 53 before the monsoon session of Parliament lead a delegation THANKS TO BJP LEADERS to Delhi and meet all leaders including allies of congress like Mamta Banerjee, Sarad Bhawar and explain the rationale for our katchatheevu Retrieval move- the abrogation of the agreement. Finally she can meent Dr. ment sincerely thank the Tamil Nadu B.J.P. Manmohan Sigh P.M. and convince him easily saying the rea- Leaders Shri. Pon. Radhakrishnan, State son that from the starting, U.S.A is opposing the 1974 Agree- President, Shri. Moharaj, State organising ment since the international equi – Distance method was not secretary, Smt. Vanathi Srinivasan, State followed while determining the boundary line in the historic secretary for their kind co-operation waters of palk strait otherwise the maritime boundary line extended to us whenever we needed, Thanks would have fallen on the eastern side of the Katchatheevu and to them, we got the opportunity to meet the Katchatheevu would be within the Indian Territory. Smt. Sushma swaraj, leader of opposition at Chennai on 04-11-2011 on her way to Moreover the Congress Party, leader of the U.P.A, on Nagapattinam to console the family seeing the results of Tamil Nadu Assembly elections should members of the two Fishermen killed come down from their stand on this Katchatheevu issue. If by the Srilankan Navy. they hesitate or refuse to do so, then the Tamil Nadu C.M. Selvi Jayalalitha should strive to move a private member Bill We utilyzed the opportunity properly. We or Resolution in the Parliament to annul the 1974 and 1976 explained her in detail the history of katchatheevu and also the agreements. immediate need to retrieve the island to put an end to the plight of our fishermen. We clearly subtsantiated our demand. She ob- The Tamil Nadu C.M. Selvi. Jayalalitha’s vocabulary serve our every word and assured to take up this issue to their would immensely help in convincing leaders of many parties. core committee and do the needful. The involvement of foreign powers in Srilanka and the lack of absolute majority to the congress in the parliament can be The very next day on 0511-2011 in a press meet at taken advantage by Selvi Jayalalitha. If she could succeed, she Nagapattinam, She assured that will outwit all other leaders and will be elated as the guardian even through the BJP has no M.P. angel who secured the rights and protected the life and lib- from Tamil Nadu, she herself would act as a Tamil Nadu M.P. Retreival Movement believe she will do it. for the sake of our Fishermen. erty “Weof the take fishermen. oath this She daycould of do Independence it and our Katchatheevu to retrieve Smt. Sushma swaraj kept the katchatheevu island which was illeagally ceded to to her word when 136 Tamil Srilanka during the year 1974. We will retrieve our island. If Fishermen of India were arrested necessary Tamilnadu Government will put forth the just de- by the Srilankan Navy and jailed mand to the centre Government. If not the centre Government at Jaffna. She immediately ar- consider our demand we will prepare to fight.” ranged for an agitalion in front of the Srilankan Embassy at New -Selvi. J.Jayalalitha on 15-8-91 Delhi on 16-02-2011 and she in her independence day speech

54 55 herself led the agitation. Subsquently she took all necessary ac- OUR FIVE MAIN DEMANDS TO tions and forced the Srilankan Government to release all our Fishermen from Jaffna. U.P.A. GOVERNMENT Shri. Nitin Gadkari, National Presi- After a deep analysis on this burning issue, KATCHA dent, BJP on his part, met the Nation- THEEVU RETRIEVAL MOVEMENT places before the UPA al Human Rights commission Chair- - man and members on 03-03-2011 ation to put an end to the plight of the Indian Fishermen of along with BJP National Secretary Governemnt the following five main Demands for consider Shri Muralidhar Rao and BJP Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu State President DEMANDS Shri Pon. Radhakrishnan and asked them (i) To remove immediately the ban through which to intervene in to the matter of barbaric killings of more than 500 innocent Tamil the fulfillment of the traditional rights of the ndian Fish- Fishermen by the Srilankan Navy. Shri Ni- ermen over Katchatheevu and the palk straits has been tin Gadkari has also filed a complaint peti- kept in abeyance since 1983. tion through his lawer Aman Sinha in this (ii) To annual the 1974 and 1976 traitorous agree- regard. Consequently the National Human ments and retireve Katchatheevu. Rights Commission has issued notice to the Central Government and asked it to report (iii) To pay a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs to each family of back to National Human Rights commis- the Fishermen who were killed / disabled / untraced due sion within two weeks on this issue. to the attack of the Srilankan navy since 1983. We hope the BJP will raise the katchatheevu and Tamil (iv) To restrain Sri Lanka from deploying its navy Fishermen issue in the forthciming monsoon session of the near Katchatheevu until a Tamil Provincial council merg- Parliament properly and do all the deedful to abrogate the ing the North and East of Srilanka is formed as per the 1974 and 1976 agreements and retrieve katchatheevu. The preservation of unity and territorial integrity of our country now “1987 – Rajiv – Jeyawardhanaa Pact” and a new agree- lies in the hands of B.J.P. ment agreeable by both the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and the Tamil Provincial Council of Srilanka is made on this issue. (v) To arrest the Srilankan naval personals involved in the attacks against the Indian Fishermen of Tamil Nadu and bring them to India for being traied according to the Indian laws. A letter has been sent to Dr.Manmohan Singh, Prime

56 57 Minister of India Stressing the above demands copy of which have done an enormous research on Katcha Theevu Island is given below. and arrived a conclusion which will protect the lives of our To - tion. We would like to place before you the following 5 de- Dr. MANMOHAN SINGH fishermenmands in brief and upholdfor your the consideration soverignty andand degnitysuitable of action our nato Honorable Prime Minister of India put an end to the plight of the Indian Fishermen of Tamilnadu 152, South Block, New Delhi - 110011. started since 1983. Sir, DEMAND – I : Sub : Katcha Theevu Island - Retrievel of Katcha Eventhough our Katcha Theevu Island has been ceded Theevu Island -5 Demands - placed before the U.P.A Govern- to Srilanka in the 1974 India - Srilanka agreement, this agree- ment - to put an end to the plight of Indian Fishermen of ment states that Indian Fishermen and pilgrims will enjoy Tamilnadu - Reg. access to visit Katcha Theevu as hitherto and will not be re- quired by Srilanka to obtain travel documents or visas for We would like to bring to your kind notice that inspite of repeated assurances given by Shri. S.M. Krishna, Hon. Minis- been in abeyance since 1983 due to the security situation in thethese Palk purposes. Strait. But fulfilment of these traditional rights has Srilankan Navy has not stopped its indiscriminate attack on theter ofIndian external Fishermen affairs ofon Tamilnadu.behalf of Srilankan Government, The Now the situation has completely changed. The Sri- lankan Government have alredy declared that they have de- The Srilankan Navy have abducted four Rameswaram stroyed L.T.T.E totally in Srilanka. The Tamilnadu Police have Fishermen who were missing since 2nd April and cruelly tor- also stated that there is no L.T.T.E movement in Tamilnadu. Now, under the entirely new circumstances, the U.P.A Govern- ment can very well issue orders allowing the Indian Fisher- tureda brutal them retaliation and finally on killedthe innocent them and Tamil then Fishermen threw away by their Sri- men of Tamilnadu to enjoy their traditional rights over Katcha bodieslankan oneNavy by dejected one in different over their placesNation’s of thedefeat palk in strait. the Cricket It was Theevu and the Palk Strait assured in the articles 5 and 6 of the 1974 agreement and also warming the Srilankan Govern- No one can even imagine such a savagery but it is the world cup final match against india. ment to abide by the terms and conditions of the 1974 India real image of the Srilankan Savages. - Srilankan Government. It is needless to stress that as per Article 21 of our Indian We want to stress that the above suggestion is only an Constitution, it is the bounden duty of the U.P.A Government immediate and interim relief but the permanant solution to to safeguard the lives of all Indian Citizens including the Fish- put an end to the plight of our Fishermen is described below ermen of Tamilnadu. But the U.P.A Government totally failed under demand II. to save the lives of the Indian Fishermen of Tamilnadu. DEMAND – II : We are a non political association of citizens, concerned The 1974 and 1976 agreements made between India with the safety and security of our Tamilnadu Fishermen. We and Srilanka do not have a leagal sanctity since these agree-

58 59 - (vi) The U.S.A have already warned that there are more an Government has not been abiding by the terms and condi- than 200 Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists in Srilanka. ments have not been ratified by our Parliament, The Srilank tions of the 1974 agreement. We would therefore like to pointout clearly that the Moreover, Mr. W.T. Jayasinghe the former Srilankan 1974 and 1976 India Srilanka agreements are not solemn Foreign Secretary (1972 - 1989) who has signed in the 1976 agreements as stated bv Shri. S.M. Krishna. minister of exter- agreement on behalf of the Srilankan Government, has wrong- ly stated in his book “Katchatheevu and maritime boundary - Srilanka agreements are satanic agreements which are going of Srilanka” that as per the terms of the 1976 agreement be- nalto bring affairs a big in blowthe Parliament on the sovereignty but these and 1974 safety and of 1976 India India via tween the foreign secretaries of India and Srilanka, the Indian Kutchatheevu shortly. Fishermen and pilgrims would not enjoy to visit Katchatheevu We therefore request the U.P.A Government headed by as hitherto. This statement of Mr. W.T. Jayasinghe the former you again to annul the 1974 and 1976 agreements and re- Srilankan Foreign Secretary is the best example for a pure lie. trieve Katchatheevu Island and the seas between India and This one reason is enough for the U.P.A Government to an- Srilanka to safeguard the sovereignty and safety of India im- nul both the 1974 and 1976 agreements and bring not only mediately. Katchatheevu but also the entire seas between India and Sri- lanka under Indian Suzerainty. DEMAND – III : We sincerely and earnestly believe that retrieving The Indian Fishermen of Tamilnadu are the sole bread Katchatheevu Island will not only protect our Indian Fisher- men of Tamilnadu but also protect the sovereignty and safety winners of their respective families. Moreover, the fishermen of our nation for the following reasons. Therefore, the U.P.A Government should consider paying a minimumdo not know sum any of otherRs.10/- job lakhs or profession to each of other the family than fishing. of the (i) More than one lakh Chinese Army men under guise of ordinary civilan have been deployed in Srilanka, acts of Srilankan navy since 1983. The Indian Government fishermenshould also who support were and killed aid / the disabled govt. of / Tamilnaduuntraced due in provid to the- convicts of china who have already been brought to Srilanka from China.(ii) The above figure does not include the merely 25,000 1983. ing a job to the member of the affected fishermen family since (iii) The Indian Pilgrims who visited Katcha Theevu last DEMAND – IV : year have witnessed Chinese military tents in that Island. The seas between India and Srilanka supports the live- lyhood of Tamil Fishermen of both the countries India and the presence of Chinesemen in the Srilankan Naval Boats that Srilanka. Tamilnadu has its own democratically elected gov- were involved(iv) The Indian in attacking Fishermen them. of Tamilnadu have confirmed (v) The Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists arrested in India in Srilanka do not have a Tamil provinical council to represent ernment but the Tamil fishermen in the northern part of connection with the bomb-blast in the German Bakery, Pune, their real interests. It will be prudent to refer the “1987 Rajiv have already agreed that they had been trained in Columbo - Jeyawardhane Pact” which stresses the importance of merg- capital of Srilanka for this operation. ing the northern and eastern province of Srilanka and form a

60 61 duly elected government in that region i.e., a Tamil Provincial WHO ARE TAMILS? Council. When such an elected government is constituted in INDIANS? OR ALIENS? the northern province of Srilanka as per the 1987 Rajiv - It is recorded in the history of the Indian Freedom Jeyawardhane Pact, then the Chief Minister of Tamilnadu and Struggle that the Plasi war of 1757 was the Chief Minister of North and East merged Tamil Provincial Council can sit together and arrive at a just solution to suit the But two years earlier to the Plasi war, dur- ingthe firstthe year war 1755against a Tamilthe British king invaders.by name and Srilankan Governments may constitute a new agreement. Poolithevan raised his sword against the Tillinterests then of india both shouldsides fishermen. restrain Accordingly Srilanka from both deploying the Indian its navy near Katchatheevu. for more than 12 years against the East IndiaBritish Company invaders Army. and gave Following a tough Poolit fight- DEMAND - V : hevan, so many Tamil kings and their India should compel Srilanka to proceed against its Generals like Alagamuthu Kone, Ondipu- naval personals who are involved in the attacks against the li veeran, Veera Pandiya Kattappomman, Tamilnadu Fishermen since 1983. India should also exercise Oomaithurai, Sundaralingam, Muthuva- its right in seeking deportation of this naval personals for duganatha Udayanathevar and his wife beeing tried according to the Indian laws. Rani Velunachiyar, Kuyili, Marudhu Pan- Sir, dias, Rebel Muth- We hope you will convene your cabinet meeting to con- aramalingam, Raja of Rammad, Gopal- sider our demands and take suitable decisions and steps to samy Naicker of Viruppatchi, Theeran put an end to the plight of the Indian Fishermen of Tamil- Chinnamalai and others in association nadu, with Tippusulthan Tiger of Mysore fought hard against British. But all Thanking you, Yours truly along with the defeat of the vellore Sd/-xxxxxx revolutiontheir efforts during came the to yearan sorrowful 1806 which end (Seethayin Maindhan) was recorded in the history, the Vellore Katchatheevu Retrieval moment mutiny. Then only the north Indian kings united and fought under the leadership of Bahadursha, the last Mogul Emperor against the British in- vaders. That too faced a sorrowful end which - dence war of 1857. was recorded in the history, the first indepen 62 63 During the year 1858 the East India company Rule came to an end and the direct Rule of Queen victoria Started. Then the freedom struggle went in to the hands of the com- mon public. The whole Indians united together under the

During this part of Independence Struggle also the congress roof to fight for their rights. contribution of Tamils had been second to none.

It is to be noted that Gandhiji himself has told that during his movements in south Africa a Tamil Girl by name Thillayadi Valliammai had inspired him a lot. It is also to be noted that once when Gandhiji was asked about the closure of his agitation movements against the

1. During the 1st phase of the Congress movement V.O. Childambaram Pillai, the Great Tamil Poet Bharathi, Saint Sub- toddy shops, he replied that was not in his hands but in ramaniya Siva, Madasamy, the hands of the ladies of E.V.R. Naicker’s Family. Vanjinathan, Va.Ve.Su Iyyer 3. During the Third Phase of the in- etc. etc. fought for the free- dependence war, under the leadership of dom under the ledership Netaji, Pasumpone Muthuramalinga The- of Lokamanya Thilagar of var who was called as “South Indian Sub- Maharastra. ash” fought for the freedom. 2. During 2nd phase of the Congress movement un- Once Netaji told that if he had a rebirth der the leadership of Gandhiji so may leaders of Tamil Nadu he wished to born in south India as a Tamil. like Thiru.V.Ka, Periar, Rajaji, Sathyamoorthy, Jeeva, Kamaraj, It was because most of the soldiers joined Thiyagi Tirupur Kumar, Thiyagi Sangaralinga Nadar, MA.Po. in his Indian National Army are Tamils from Sivagnana Gramaniyar, Nesamani Nadar, Thiyagi Viswanatha all parts of south Asia particularly from Bur- Dass etc. etc. Fought for the freedom. ma and Maleya. Tamils of all religions joined

64 65 the I.N.A. with a single thought that they were all Indians. destroyed completely in Srilanka. In the absence of the L.T.T.E. Ameer Hamsa an ex I.N.A. personal aged 95 still alive in movement in Srilanka, than what reason could the Srilankan Tamil Nadu is a Tamil. Government say for the murder of the Tamil Fisherman after Who could measure the tears and blood shed by the 19th may 2009? Tamils since 1755 to free India? who could count the no of It is obvious that the Reason is nothing but they were all Tamils. More than 10,000 times the Sirlankan navy had at- lives sacrificed by the Tamils since 1755?. How many Tamil tacked the Tamil Fishermen . Estimates say more than 500 freedomBut fighters what is lost reciprocated their houses, by lands, the congress jeweles, cattlerulers and to Tamil Fishermen were killed since 1983. 3000 Fishermen theeven Tamils their families after independence? in the freedom Dayfight? by day the Srilankan have been permanently disabled and thousand others were navy is increasing its attrocities against the Tamil Fisher- injured, besides hundreds of them have disappeared. Many men. Day by day the congress rulers are developing their more have been illegally detained in Srilankan Jails and Tor- friendship and cordial relationship with the Srilankan tured. Most of the time, the Srilankan Navy invaded in to our Rulers and Officials. - territory and attacked our fishermen. Once, they even invaded in to our fishermen village by name Olakkuda near Thanush kodi and firedIt isthe veryhuts of very our fishermenshame to mention and went here, back. that not even a single time the In- dian Navy went to rescue the Indian Fishermen of Tamil The attack of the Srilankan Navy on the innocent Indi- Nadu from the Srilankan Na- val attack. Will the Congress been a continuous tragedy since 1950. Rulers and their colleagues of the U.P.A. Government please an fishermenYes, The ofSrilankan Tamil Nadu navy has started not startedto attack yesterday. and kill Indian It has answer the following question? Fishermen since 1950 saying that they were trying to immi-

grate in to Srilanka illegally. Then after 1960 the Srilankan Who are Tamils? Indians? or Aliens? Nevy continued their attrocities against the Tamil Fishermen The First man who seeded the doc- saying they were smugglers. Then after 1980 the Srilankan trine of Socialism and communism in In- Navy started to attack the Tamil Fishermen more savagely dia and fought for the working class till his then ever before saying they were the supporters of L.T.T.E. death is Singaravelar a Chennai Tamil. It is After 19th May 2009, more than 30 Indian Fishermen to be noted that even though he had been had been killed by the Srilankan Navy. The Srilankan Govern- an advocate in the Chennai High Court, his ment had already declared that the L.T.T.E movement was

66 ancestors are67 fishermen. JAIHIND Annexure - I Jaihind Shenbagaraman Pillai, (15.09.1891 to 13.05.1934) an Indian AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIA Revolutionary during the Indian Inde- pendence movement went abroad to or- AND SRI LANKA ON THE BOUNDARY ganise an army to declare war against the IN HISTORIC WATERS BETWEEN THE British for the Freedom of India. The Slo- gan Jai Hind that inspired lakhs and lakhs TWO COUNTRIES of Indians during the freedom struggle is AND RELATED MATTERS the brain child of Shenbagaraman Pillai. he had been the engineer of the The Government of the Republic of India and the Government famous German warship EMDEN that of the Republic of Sri Lanka, - ing the Fist world war. Desiring to determine the boundary line in the historic waters terrified the powerful British Navy dur Netaji followed the democratic between India and Sri Lanka and to settle the related matters in a path of C.R. Dass in India and aborad the manner which is fair and equitable to both sides, war path of Shenbagaraman. Having examined the entire question from all angles and taken When Adolf Hitler expressed his into account the historical and other evidence and legal aspects views that Indi- ans were still incapable of ruling them- thereof, selves, Shenbagaraman raised his voice Have agreed as follows: against his views and he even forced Hitler to apologize in writing. Shen- ARTICLE 1 bagaraman Pillai is a Tamil descent. That particular gene which was in the The boundary between India and Sri Lanka in the waters from blood of shenbagaraman response for Adam’s Bridge to Palk Strait shall be arcs of Great Circles between that much of his gut and courage is the following positions, in the sequence given below, defined by even now existing in the blood of all latitude and longitude: tamils in India and abroad. These genes may recess now but would dominate soon. Position 1 : 10° 05’ North, 80° 03’ East JAI HIND! JAI TAMILS! Position 2 : 09° 57’ North, 79° 35’ East Katchatheevu is ours! Final Victory also ours! Position 3 : 09° 40.15’ North, 79° 22.60’ East Position 4 : 09° 21.80’ North, 79° 30.70’ East

68 69 Position 5 : 09° 13’ North, 79° 32’ East ARTICLE 7 Position : 09° 06’ North, 79° 32’ East If any single geological petroleum or natural gas structure or field, or any single geological structure or field of any other mineral ARTICLE 2 deposit, including sand or gravel, extends across the boundary referred to in Article 1 and the part of such structure or field which The coordinates of the positions specified in Article I are is situated on side of the boundary, is exploited, in whole or in geographical coordinates and the straight lines connecting them part, from the other side of the boundary, the two countries shall are indicated in the chart annexed hereto which has been signed by seek to reach agreement as to the manner in which the structure or the surveyors authorized by the two Government, respectively. field shall be most effectively exploited and the manner in which the proceeds deriving there from shall be appointed. ARTICLE 3 ARTICLE 8 The actual location of the aforementioned positions at sea and on the seabed shall be determined by a method to be mutually This agreement shall be subject to ratification. It shall enter into agreed upon by the surveyors authorized for the purpose by the force on the date of exchange of the instruments of the ratification two Governments, respectively. which will take place as soon as possible.

ARTICLE 4 For the Government of the For the Government of the Republic of India Republic of Sri Lanka Each country shall have sovereignty and exclusive jurisdiction and control over the waters, the islands, the continental shelf and the Sd/ - Indira Gandhi Sd/- Srimavo subsoil thereof, falling on its own side of the aforesaid boundary. R.D.Bandaranaike New Delhi 28 June 1974 Colombo 26 June 1974 ARTICLE 5

Subject to the foregoing, Indian fisherman and pilgrims will enjoy access to visit Kachchativu as hitherto, and will not be required by Sri Lanka to obtain travel documents or visas for these purposes.

ARTICLE 6

The vessels of India and Sri Lanka will enjoy in each other’s waters such rights as they have traditionally enjoyed therein.

70 71 Annexure - II Position 4 m : 080 40’. ON. 790 18’.2 E Position 5 m : 080 37’.2 N., 790 13’.O.E Agreement between india and Sri lanka on the Maritime Position 6 m : 080 31’.2 N., 790 04’.7 E Boundary between the two countries in the gulf of Mannar Position 7 m : 080 22’.2N., 780 55’.4 E and the Bay of Bengal and related matters, 1976 Position 8 m : 080 12’.2 N., 780 53.7 E Position 9 m : 070 35’.3N., 780 45.7 E (Signed at the level of foreign secretaries) Position 10 m : 070 21’.O.N., 780 38’.8 E The Government of the Republic of India and the Government Position 11 m : 060 30.8 N., 710 12’.2 E of the Republic of Sri Lanka. Position 12 m : 050 53. 9 N., 770 10’.6 E Position 13 m : 050 00. N., 770 10’.6 E Recalling that the boundary in the Palk Strait has been settled by the Agreement between the Republic of India and the Republic The extention of the boundary beyond position 13m will be of Sri Lanka on the boundary in Historic Waters between the Two done subsequently. countries and Related Matters, signed on 26/28 June 1974. Article - II

And desiring to extend that boundary by determining the The maritime boundary between India and Sri Lanka in the Bay maritime boundary between the two countries in the Gulf of of Bengal shall be arcs of Great Circles between the following Mannar and the Bay of Bengal, positions, in the sequence given below, defined by latitude and longitude : Have Agreed as follows : Position 1 b : 100 05. 0 N., 800 03.O E Article - I Position 1 ba : 100 05. 9N., 800 05.O E Position 1 bb : 100 08.4N., 800 09’ 5 E The maritime boundary between India and Sri Lanka in the Gulf Position 2 b : 100 33. O.N., 800 46.O E of Mannar shall be arcs of Great Circles between the following Position 3 b : 100 31. 7 N., 810 02’.5 E positions, in the sequence given below, defined by latitude and Position 4 b : 110 02 N., 810 56. O E longitude : Position 5 b : 110 16.O.N., 820 22’.O E Position 1 m : 090 06, O.N., 790 32. O E Position 2 m : 090 00’.O.N. 790 31’ E Position 3 m : 080 53’. O.N. 790 29.3 E

72 73 Article - III field, or any single geological structure of field of any mineral deposit, including sand or gravel, extends across the boundary The co-ordinates of the positions specified in Articles I and II referred to in Articles I and II and the part of such structure or are geographical coordinates and the straight lines connecting filled which is situated on one side of the boundary is exploited, them are indicated in the chart annexed hereto, which has in whole or in part, from the other side of the boundary, the two been signed by the surveyors duly authorised by the two countries shall seek to reach agreement as to the manner in which governments, respectively. the structure or field shall be most effectively exploited and Article - IV the manner in which the proceeds deriving there from shall be apportioned. The actual location at sea and on the seabed of the positions specified in Articles I and II shall be determined by a method to be Article - VII mutually agreed upon by the surveyors authorized for the purpose The Agreement shall be subject to ratification. It shall enter by the two governments, respectively. into force on the date of exchange of instruments of ratification Article - V which shall take place soon as possible.

1. Each party shall have sovereignly over the historic waters and Sd/ - Kewal Singh Sd/ - W.T. Jayasinghe territorial sea, as well as over the Islands, falling on its side of For the Government of the For the Government of the aforesaid boundary. Republic of India the Republic of Sri Lanka 2. Each party shall have sovereign rights and exclusive jurisdiction New Delhi : 23 March 1976. over the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone as well as over their resources, whether living or non-living, falling on its side of the aforesaid boundary.

3. Each party shall respect rights of navigation through its territorial sea and exclusive economic zone in accordance with its law and regulations and the rules of international law.

Article - VI

If any single geological petroleum or natural gas structure or

74 75 Annexure - III general description and outline of which is given in the enclosed note and chart, lies within the exclusive economic Exchange of Letter zone of India and India shall have sovereign rights over the area and its resources. Letter from Kewal Singh, Foreign Secretary to the government of India to W.T. Jayasinghe, Secretary in the 2. The fishing vessels of Sri Lanka and persons on board Ministry of Defence and Foreign Affairs, Government of these vessels shall not engage in fishing in the Wadge Bank. Sri Lanka dated March 23, 1976. However, at the request of the Government of Sri Lanka and as a gesture of goodwill, the government of India agrees that Ministry of External Affairs, Sri Lanka fishing vessels duly licensed by the Government of New Delhi, India may engage in fishing in the Wadge Bank for a period 23rd March 1976 of three years from the date of establishment by India of its Excellency, exclusive economic zone. It is agreed that the number of Sri Lanka fishing vessels shall not exceed six, and their fish catch An agreement has been concluded between India and Sri Lanka in the Wadge Bank shall not exceed two thousand tones, in on Maritime Boundary between the two countries in the Gulf any one year. At the expiry of this period, Sri Lanka vessels of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal and Related Matters which shall cease to fish in the Wadge Bank. was signed on 23 March 1976. Our two governments have also exchanged views on the substance of our proposed maritime 3. The fishing by Sri Lanka vessels in the Wadge Bank shall be legislation. With the establishment of the exclusive economic subject ot the terms and conditions, including the fees to be zones by the two countries, India and Sri Lanka will exercise charged, specified by the government of India and to inspection sovereign rights over the living and non-living resources of their and control by the Indian authorities. The Sri Lanka fishing respective zone. The fishing vessels and fishermen of India shall vessels shall comply with these terms and conditions. not engage in fishing in the historic waters, the territorial sea and 4. If the government of India decides to explore the Wadge Bank the exclusive economic zone of Sri Lanka nor shall the fishing of petroleum and other mineral resources during the period vessels and fishermen of Sri Lanka engage in fishing in the historic mentioned in sub-paragraph (2), the Government of India shall waters, the territorial sea and the exclusive economic zone of India, notify to the Government of Sri Lanka the zones reserved for without the express permission of Sri Lanka or India, as the case such exploration and the date of commencement of exploration. may be, In this connection, the following understanding has been Sri Lanka fishing vessels shall terminate fishing activity, if any, reached between our two governments in respect of fishing in the in these zones with effect from the date of commencement of wadge bank. exploration. 1. The Wadge Bank which is located near cape comorin, the

76 77 5. The facility allowed to the Sri Lanka fishing vessels and person on board those vessels is restricted to the fishing vessels owned by the government of Sri Lanka or by a Sri Lanka Company Annexure - IV or its nationals. This facility shall not be transferable to any INDIA-SRILANKA MAP SHOWING other state or its vessels or nationals. THE MARITIME BOUNDARY 6. At the request of the Government of Sri Lanka, the Government DETERMINED IN THE AGREEMENTS MADE BY of India agree to provide annually to Sri Lanka two thousand THE TWO COUNTRIES DURING 1974 AND 1976 tones of fish of the quality and species and at the price to be mutually agreed upon between the two governments, for a period of five years with effect from the date of cessation of fishing activity by Sri Lanka vessels in the Wadge Bank as stipulated in sub-para (2).

7. The Government of Sri Lanka, upon terms to make available to the Government of Sri Lanka, upon terms and conditions to be agreed upon between the two governments, technical assistance for the development of Sri Lanka’s fisheries arising from the diversion of Sri Lanka’s fishing vessels from the Wadge Bank.

I shall be grateful if you kindly confirm that the above set out correctly the understanding reached between our two governments. On receipt of your letter confirming this understanding, the understanding embodied in this letter shall constitute an Agreement between our two governments.

Accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration. Wadge Bank.

Sd /- Kewal Singh

Foreign Secretary to the Government of India.

78 79 referrences

1. Varulatril katchatheevu By Singaravelan

2. Singala Kadarpadayin Attuzhiam By Maravan Pulavu Sachidhanandhan

3. Namathu Katchatheevu By Dr. Se. Rasu

4. Katchatheevu - Maraikkapadum Varalaru -Parikkapadum Meenavar Uraimaigal By D. Arul Ezhilan

5. Katchatheevu Yarukku Chondham? By S.Diwan

6. Katchatheevu - Sovereignty of India By Prof. S. Krishnaswamy M.A.,M.L.

7. Articles of Prof. V. Suryanarayan on India’s Bilateral Agreements

80 81 82 83