The Common Tamil Presidential Candidate Controversy

Packiyaselvam Ariyanethiran

The eagerly anticipated 2024 presidential election is scheduledto be held on September 21, 2024.  Initially, 39 candidates were in the fray. The death of a declared candidate has lowered the number to 38. Chief among the candidates are incumbent President Ranil Wickremesinghe and Leader of the Opposition Sajith Premadasa. 

Among other notable presidential aspirants are JVP/NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake, SLPP national organiser Namal Rajapaksa, media mogul Dilith Jayaweera, Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka, Former  Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, Ex-Sports Minister Roshan Ranasinghe, Veteran leftist Siritunge Jayasuriya, FSP activist Nuwan Bopage and former  Batticaloa Parliamentarian P. Ariyanethiran. 

It is common knowledge that the three main contenders in the presidential stakes  are Ranil Wickremesinghe, Sajith Premadasa and AK Dissanayake. Two others expected to make a mark are Namal Rajapaksa and Dilith  Jayaweera. 

There are however some candidates who are competing due to specific reasons.   Some are “dummy” candidates propped up by vested interests. Some are publicity seekers. Many candidates know well that they have no chance whatsoever of winning. Nevertheless, they are contesting with a specific purpose or to prove a point.

One such person is Packiyaselvam Ariyanethiran contesting as an independent  candidate under the conch or chank symbol. The 69-year-old former Batticaloa district MP  is contesting  as the Common Tamil presidential candidate. He is backed by a group comprising civil society organisations and political parties. Ariyanethiran known generally as Ariyam is described in the Tamil media as the “Thamizh Pothu Vaetpaalar”or Tamil common candidate. 

Major  Controversy

The fielding of a  Tamil candidate in the current presidential election has created a major controversy. The Sri Lankan Tamils are only 11.1 % of Sri Lanka’s population. Obviously the Tamil candidate has no chance of winning the poll. Therefore many Tamils are of the opinion that the  common Tamil candidate project is silly and unnecessary. 

The proponents of the common candidate project counter this by stating that their  objective is not   victory at the polls. According to these circles the common Tamil candidate by contesting will draw attention to the  unresolved Tamil national question both nationally and internationally. 

They say that the current presidential election focuses mainly on economic issues, corruption and system change.  Specific Issues concerning the Sri Lankan Tamils of the Northern and Eastern provinces are ignored, underplayed  or overlooked. Hence the common Tamil candidate will remind  everyone concerned that the grievances of Tamils are yet to be redressed and aspirations accommodated. 

It is also pointed out that Tamils have been voting for Sinhala presidential aspirants in the past. Many  promise many things but fail to deliver. So this time the Tamils can prove a point by  voting for a Tamil presidential candidate it is argued. Besides mobilising votes for a common Tamil candidate, would also help  promote greater Tamil solidarity and unity and prevent further Tamil fragmentation. 

Another point emphasised by some of the Tamil candidate project is that it could be portrayed as a referendum of sorts. The  moderate line is that the votes cast could  be interpreted as being supportive of the Tamil nationalist objective of a merged Northern and Eastern province based on the Federal idea. The Extremist line is that the votes polled by the Tamil candidate would reaffirm and reinforce the triple principles of  “Suyanirnayam” (self-determination), “Thesiyam”( nationalism) and  “Thayagam” (homeland). 

Those who are not in favour of a common Tamil candidate rebut these arguments by pointing out that the Tamil people are likely to vote in large numbers  for one of the main “Sinhala” candidate  who has a chance of winning than a Tamil  candidate who has absolutely no chance of winning. Therefore the common Tamil candidate project is an exercise in futility they say.

They also point out that the Tamil people of the North and East since 1952   have been   consistently voting in   Parliamentary elections in support of a power sharing arrangement based on federal principles. Therefore  the 2024 presidential poll need not be utilised to re-invent the wheel.

Critics of the Common Tamil candidate project also state that the current presidential election is different from past polls. The three main candidates are amenable  to  the Tamil demand of greater power sharing or enhanced devolution. It would be better to await the release of their election manifestos and thereafter engage in meaningful discussions  instead of foreclosing such options by fielding a  common  Tamil candidate. 

 Moreover the critics state that the  Tamil common candidate must get at least 50 % of the Northern and Eastern votes  to justify and bolster his political demands. This  does not seem possible in the current context. Furthermore the Tamils are only the single largest community in the East. The Muslims and Sinhalese  together outnumber the Tamils. Hence the voting results could indicate that the Tamils are a minority in the East and undermine the case  for a merged North-East. 

It is also argued that the description “Tamil Common candidate” is invalid. Though a group of political parties and organisations are proposing a Tamil common presidential candidate there are other  Tamil political parties and groups who are opposed. Some Tamil parties have already announced that they are backing a particular “Sinhala” candidate. Under these circumstances the independent Tamil candidate is not entitled to the title of “Common Tamil Presidential candidate” say the critics. 

Background and History

It is against this backdrop of arguments for and against the Common Tamil presidential candidate that this column focuses on the topic this week. In order to fully understand the ramifications of this  Tamil candidate  project, it is somewhat necessary to delve  briefly into  its  history and background. 

The military defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May 2009  ended the long war of South Asia. It also  opened up a new phase in Tamil electoral politics. When presidential elections were held in 2010, the opposition parties fielded former Army Commander Sarath Fonseka as the common opposition candidate against incumbent  President Mahinda Rajapaksa. 

The  premier political configuration representing the Tamils of Northern and Eastern Sri Lanka at that time was the Tamil National Alliance (TNA). The TNA then comprised ITAK, TELO, EPRLF and ACTC. The TNA also backed  Fonseka. 

MK Sivajilingam

This was objected to strongly by TELO Jaffna district Parliamentarian MK Sivajilingam. Sivaji was of the view that both Rajapaksa and Fonseka were responsible for the alleged atrocities committed against the Tamil people during the final phase of the war and therefore should be opposed. 

Sivajilingam proposed that the Tamil parties should field a separate  Tamil candidate  instead of supporting Fonseka.  Sivaji’s viewpoint was rejected by the TNA hierarchy. Therefore the maverick MP broke away from the TNA  and contested the 2010 presidential poll. He projected himself as the common Tamil presidential candidate and called upon Tamils to vote for him instead of a Sinhala candidate. This was the beginning of the Common Tamil presidential candidate concept. Sivajilingam fared miserably polling only 9662 votes. 

Gotabaya Rajapaksa was the presidential candidate  of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) in 2019. Sivajilingam  again suggested that a Common Tamil  candidate should be  fielded to draw attention  to the alleged war crimes committed when Gota was the Defence secretary. Sivaji tried to get support from Tamil political parties for this common Tamil candidate  project but there were no takers. Once again the indefatigable Sivajillingam threw his hat into the ring. He contested as an independent and sought support from Tamil parties and people. He lost again garnering only 12,256 votes. 

Sivajilingam’s double debacles demonstrated  that the Sri  Lankan Tamil people were not enamoured of the common Tamil presidential candidate project. It appeared therefore that the concept would be relegated to the dustbin of history. The concept however received a fresh lease of life due to the efforts of a senior Tamil political leader. 

Suresh  Premachandran

Kandiah Premachandran known as Suresh Premachandran/Suresh is the secretary-general/leader of the Eelam  People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF). Suresh has been a member of Parliament in 1989-1994 and 2001-2015. He has been out of Parliament for the past nine years because he failed to get the preference votes necessary to get elected. The EPRLF a founder member of the TNA in 2001 pulled out of the grouping in 2016.

It was Suresh Premachandran who began promoting the concept of a common Tamil presidential candidate project again in a big way. He began doing so from late 2023 onwards. Despite Suresh’s strenuous efforts, there  was very little support for the concept till an influential media entrepreneur got involved. Sabapathy Suppiah Kuhanathan known as SS Kuhanathan or Kuhan is the owner of the ASK Media group that runs the Jaffna based DAN TV and “Eezhanaadu” newspaper. 

Kuhanathan a  long-standing journalist with decades of experience began espousing the Common Tamil presidential candidate project from early this year. Articles, news stories and editorials promoting the Tamil candidate concept  were regularly and systematically published in the newspaper. The TV conducted several interviews and discussions in support of the concept. Furthermore Kuhan also financed several public meetings and discussions in various Tamil towns to mobilise people’s support for the project. 

As time progressed several Tamil newspaper columnists also began promoting the idea of a common Tamil presidential candidate in their writings as well as in TV interviews. There were also rumours that some Tamils from the Global Tamil Diaspora were backing the project and were providing cash support for it. Thereafter a series of workshops and discussions were held in Jaffna and Vavuniya. Several Tamil civil society organisations participated. 

Tamil Political Parties

On another level, Tamil political parties also began to get involved. As stated earlier the pioneering political party in promoting the common  Tamil candidate project was the EPRLF. Now other parties also evinced interest. An internal crisis within the TNA had resulted in the TELO and PLOTE chartering their independent course. Both parties along with the  EPRLF and two other parties  had formed the Democratic Tamil National Alliance (DTNA). The ITAK was isolated within the TNA 

The Common Tamil candidate concept drew in more Tamil political  parties in support. Altogether seven political parties were supportive of the project. They were the Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front, Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization, People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam, Tamil People’s Alliance, Tamil National Party, Crusaders for Democracy and the Tamil National Green Movement. 

On the other hand a collective of  81 Tamil civil society organisations, trade associations and worker unions  were formed to coordinate and implement the common candidate project. This body was named the “Thamil Makkal Pothu Sabhai”(Tamil people’s general council). This representative council had an executive  committee as well as an  advisory committee  to oversee matters. 

“Pothuk Kattamaippu”

Thereafter, the Tamil People’s General Council and the seven political parties referred to earlier came to a working arrangement to implement the common candidate project. The “Tamil Thesiya Pothu Kattamaippu” (Tamil national general structure) was set up. The  structure had a high command comprising  fourteen members. Seven were  civil society representatives while the other  seven were political party leaders. 

The political party leaders  were  N. Srikantha, D. Siddharthan, S.Premachandran, S.Adaikkalanathan, C.V. Wigneswaran, T. Vaenthan and P. Aingaranesan. The civil society representatives were K.T. Ganeshalingam, Selvin Mariyampillai, C.Jothilingam, A.Jathindra, K.Nilanthan, T.Vasantharajah and R.Wikneswaran. Ten of the fourteen high command members were from Jaffna. The other four comprise one each from the electoral districts of Wanni, Trincomalee, Amparai and Batticaloa. 

Ariyanethiran alias “Ariyam”

Thereafter the process of selecting a common candidate was expedited. According to informed political sources, close upon a hundred names were considered initially. This was reduced to a long list of forty-six  names. This in turn was whittled down to a short list of seven  names. Finally Packiyaselvam Ariyanethiran alias “Ariyam” was picked as the Common Tamil Presidential Candidate.

According to Tamil civil society sources, the selection process had been faced with difficulties because many of the people approached had  turned down the offer to contest as the common Tamil candidate. In other instances  there had been objections to some by either the civil society representatives or political party leader.  The condition that the selected candidate should refrain from  contesting any poll for two years and  should not use the symbol under which he or she contests was also a major constraint. The search for a woman candidate too was unsuccessful. 

Three key  factors seem to have worked in Ariyanethiran’s favour in securing the candidacy. Firstly he was from the East. It was important to have an eastern candidate as opposed to a northern candidate to promote greater Tamil unity. Secondly Ariyanethiran has promised to retire  from electoral politics. He has said he won’t be a candidate in any poll hereafter. Thirdly Ariyanethiran being a former MP was entitled to contest as an independent candidate. Since  Tamil political parties were reluctant  to nominate a candidate under their own party symbol an independent candidate contesting under a new symbol was needed. 

The  advent of the  common Tamil candidate is likely to impact on Sinhala contenders aiming  for Tamil votes in the North and East. Votes that would have gone to them may now be cast for Ariyanethiran. Both President Wickremesinghe and Opposition Leader Premadasa  contacted the “Thamil Thesiyap Podhu Kattamaippu” and held talks. Representatives of the PLOTE,TELO and Crusaders for Democracy met with Wickremesinghe. The TELO and PLOTE held talks with Premadasa. Both were informed in detail about the reasons for fielding the Tamil   common candidate. 

Ariyanethiran born on February 1st 1955 hails from Ambilaanthurai in the Batticaloa district. He comes from a family that has been in charge of the famous “Thaan Thoandreeswarar” Sivan temple in Kokkattichoalai as hereditary trustees. Ariyam as he is known popularly is a skilful writer and  speaker in Tamil. He was the editor of the “Thamil Alai”(Tamil wave) newspaper run by the LTTE in the East many years ago. Currently he writes a political column for the “Thamilan” newspaper published in Colombo. 

Ariyanethiran entered Parliament as Batticaloa district MP  in 2004. He  contested  on the TNA ticket and   obtained  35,377 votes then. In 2010 he was re-elected as Batticaloa MP with 16,504 votes. Ariyanethiran was not able to garner enough preference votes to be elected in 2015.  He did not contest elections in 2020. He is however active in politics and is a central working committee member of the ITAK. 

ITAK Party Controversy

HEADLINE: The    Common Tamil Presidential Candidate  Controversy

The  Ilankai Thamil Arasuk Katchi (ITAK) has not taken an official position on the Common candidate project as a party so far. While persons like CVK Sivagnanam, MA Sumanthiran and Shanakiyan Rasamanickam have been critical, other ITAK stalwarts like “Maavai” Senathirajah, G. Sreenesan  and Sivagnanam Shritharan  are  supportive. 

The ITAK central working committee has authorised Sumanthiran MP to hold discussions with the main candidates and ascertain as to which candidate could be supported by the ITAK. Sumanthiran has been talking with  candidates like  Ranil Wickremesinghe, Sajith Premadasa, Anura Kumara Dissanayake  and even Namal Rajapaksa. He has been reporting back to the Party on the progress. A final decision is likely to be taken after an  intensive perusal of the electoral manifestos of the chief candidates. The ITAK is determined to be with the “winner” at this election.

While the ITAK is yet to arrive at a final decision, Ariyanethiran has taken the unilateral step of contesting as the  common Tamil presidential candidate. He is openly backed by people like Shritharan in this. The ITAK  has therefore called for an explanation from Ariyanethiran over this. His membership  in the policy making ITAK central committee has also been suspended. The ITAK has also forbidden its members from engaging in activities concerning the  Tamil presidential candidate. It appears that the already divided ITAK is heading for a massive split over this issue.

Vote for “Sangu”

Meanwhile  Ariyanethiran has embarked on his election campaign. He has commenced a political journey canvassing for votes from Poligandy in the Jaffna peninsula  to Pottuvil in the Amparai district. Ariyanethiran will  be travelling in all the district of the North and East. Ariyanethiran’s campaign motto is “Namakkaaha Naam “(Api wenuwen Api). He says he is only the symbol of Tamil nationalism and not a leader. Ariyanethiran states that  a vote for his   “Sangu”(conch) is a vote for Tamil nationalism. 

It remains to be seen as to how  the Tamil people of the North and East will respond to Ariyanethiran’s call at the polls on 21 September. If the Tamils vote in large numbers for  Ariyanethiran, the course of Tamil politics will take a more extremist turn. If Tamils do not vote in large numbers for the Tamil candidate, the Tamil nationalist cause will be weakened. Whatever the result, the ultimate losers will be the Tamil People. 

D.B.S.Jeyaraj can be reached at [email protected]