கச்சதீவும் நமதே கீழை கடலும் நமதே!




News

Facebook Updates

Facebook Posts

Unable to display Facebook posts.
Show error

Error: (#10) To use 'Page Public Content Access', your use of this endpoint must be reviewed and approved by Facebook. To submit this 'Page Public Content Access' feature for review please read our documentation on reviewable features: https://developers.facebook.com/docs/apps/review.
Type: OAuthException
Code: 10
Please refer to our Error Message Reference.

இலங்கை இனக்கொலை ஆட்சியாளர்கள் தெலுங்கர்கள் – சீதையின் மைந்தன்

இலங்கை இனக்கொலை ஆட்சியாளர்கள் தெலுங்கர்கள்

10.05.2017 அன்று சென்னை பத்திரிக்கையாளர் மன்றத்தில் கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு எழுச்சிப்பயணத் துவக்க விழாவில் “இலங்கை இனக்கொலை ஆட்சியாளர்கள் தெலுங்கர்கள்” என்ற நூல் வெளியீட்டு நிகழ்சிக் காணொலியின்
youtube இணைப்பு கீழே தரப்பட்டுள்ளது. இதனை அனைவரும் பரப்புமாறு அன்புடன் வேண்டுகிறேன்.

சீதையின் மைந்தன்
கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம்
www.katchatheevu.com


தமிழக வாழ்வுரிமை கட்சித் தலைவர் தி.வேல்முருகன் அவர்களுடன்

தமிழக வாழ்வுரிமை கட்சித் தலைவர் தி.வேல்முருகன் அவர்களுடன் நேரில் சந்திப்பு:

கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம் 10.05.2017 சென்னையில் முன்னெடுக்கும் கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு எழுச்சிப்பயணத் துவக்க நிகழ்வில் கலந்துகொண்டு நிகழ்வில் வெளியிட உள்ள ”இலங்கை இனக்கொலை ஆட்சியாளர்கள் தெலுங்கர்கள்” என்ற நூலின் முதற்படியைப் பெற்றுக்கொண்டு நிகழ்ச்சியினைச் சிறப்பிக்குமாறு, ஆற்றலரசு அவர்களுடன் நேரில் சந்தித்து கேட்டுக்கொண்டோம். முன்னரே ஒப்புக்கொண்ட வேறொரு நிகழ்ச்சியில் கலந்து கொள்வதால், இயன்றவரை நமது நிகழ்ச்சியில் பங்கேற்க முயல்வதாகவும், இயலாவிடினும் தொடர்ந்து நடைபெற இருக்கும் இந்நூலின் அறிமுக கூட்டங்களில் தான் நிச்சயம் கலந்து கொள்வதாகவும், நமது அனைத்து முயற்சிகளுக்கும் உறுதுணையாக இருப்பதாகவும் மகிழ்ச்சியுடன் தெரிவித்தார்.
தமிழக வாழ்வுரிமை கட்சித் தலைவர் தி.வேல்முருகன் அவர்களுக்கு நமது நெஞ்சார்ந்த நன்றி!!.

சீதையின் மைந்தன்
கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம்


கச்சத்தீவு தமிழீழ மீட்பு எழுச்சிப் பயணத் துவக்க விழா சீமானுக்கு அழைப்பு

சீமானுடன் சீதையின் மைந்தன், ஆற்றலரசு

18301025_1940843246149553_7870101349096257952_n

10-05-2017 அன்று சென்னையில் கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம் முன்னெடுக்கும் “கச்சத்தீவு தமிழீழ மீட்பு எழுச்சிப் பயணத் துவக்க விழா” நிகழ்வில் பங்கேற்க நாம் தமிழர் கட்சியின் முதன்மை ஒருங்கிணைப்பாளர் செந்தமிழன் சீமான் அவர்களை நேரில் சந்தித்து அழைத்தோம்.

10-05-2017 அன்று கண்ணகி கோவில் விழாவில் கலந்துகொள்ள இருப்பதால், பிறிதொரு நாளில் “இலங்கை இனக்கொலை ஆட்சியாளர்கள் தெலுங்கர்கள்” என்ற நமது நூலை தமது கட்சி சார்பாக நூல் அறிமுக நிகழ்வு ஒன்றினை தமது அலுவலக உள்ளரங்கத்திலேயே நடத்துவதாக மகிழ்ச்சியுடன் தெரிவித்தார்.

திருமிகு. சீமான் அவர்களுக்கு கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம் சார்பாக நமது நன்றியினை தெரிவித்துக்கொள்கிறோம்.

சீதையின் மைந்தன்
தாயகத்தமிழர் பேரியக்கம்
கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம்


கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு எழுச்சிப் பயண துவக்க விழா

சீதையின் மைந்தன்

கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம் சார்பாக கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு எழுச்சிப் பயண துவக்க விழா 10-05-2017 மாலை 4 மணிக்கு சென்னை பத்திரிக்கையாளர் மன்றத்தில் சிறப்பாக நடைபெற்றது.

17952575_1943293372571207_599681325993355753_n

இந்நிகழ்வில் சீதையின் மைந்தனின் “இலங்கை இனக்கொலை ஆட்சியாளர்கள் தெலுங்கர்கள்” என்ற நூல் மக்கள் மாநாடு கட்சி தலைவர் வழக்குரைஞர் சக்திவேல் அவர்களால் வெளியிடப்பட்டது.

நிகழ்ச்சியின் முழு காணொலியும் விரைவில் பதிவேற்றம் செய்யப்படும்.

சீதையின் மைந்தன்
தாயகத்தமிழர் பேரியக்கம்
கச்சத்தீவு மீட்பு இயக்கம்


அரசு விழா திருமலை நாயக்கருக்கா? ரகுநாத செதுபதிக்கா?


How to retrieve Katchatheevu island?

A presentation by Journalist & Poet Mr Seethaiyin Mainthan about how to retrieve Katchatheevu an island which was ceded to Srilanka, this presentation guides & gives valuable suggestion to Prime Minister Narendra Modi

 

கச்சதீவை மீட்பது எப்படி? – சீதையின் மைந்தன் தமிழ் பதிப்பு


பிரதமர் உள்பட 6 பேர் மீது வழக்கு பதிவு செய்ய கோரிக்கை

கச்சதீவை இலங்கைக்கு சொந்தமானது என்று கூறிவரும் பிரதமர் மன்மோகன் சிங், காங்கிரஸ் கட்சி தலைவர் சோனியா காந்தி, வெளியுறவு துறை அமைச்சர் சல்மான் குர்ஷித், பாதுகாப்பு அமைச்சர் அந்தோனி, பிரதமரின் ஆலோசகர் சிவசங்கர மேனன் உள்பட 6 பேர் மீது இ.பி.கோ 121 சட்ட பிரிவின் கீழ் வழக்கு பதிய கோரி ராமேஸ்வரம் காவல் நிலையத்தில் கச்சதீவு மீட்பு இயக்க ஒருங்கிணைப்பாளர் சீதையின் மைந்தன் மனு கொடுத்துள்ளார்

seethai-news

seethai-interview

seethai-complaint


திரு.சீதையின்மைந்தன் “மக்கள் முன்னால்” நிகழ்ச்சி தந்தி TV

கச்சதீவு மீட்பு இயக்கத்தின் தலைமை ஒருங்கிணைப்பாளர் திரு.சீதையின்மைந்தன் அவர்கள் தந்தி தொலைகாட்சியில் பங்கேற்ற “மக்கள் முன்னால்” நிகழ்ச்சி (19-01-2014 ஞாயிறு இரவு 7:30க்கு) .

 


திரு.சீதையின்மைந்தன் பங்குபெறும் “மக்கள் முன்னால்” நிகழ்ச்சி தந்தி TVல்

கச்சதீவு மீட்பு இயக்கத்தின் தலைமை ஒருங்கிணைப்பாளர் திரு.சீதையின்மைந்தன் அவர்கள் பங்குபெறும் “மக்கள் முன்னால்” நிகழ்ச்சி நாளை (19-01-2014 ஞாயிறு இரவு 7:30க்கு) தந்தி தொலைகாட்சியில் காணத்தவறாதீர்கள்.
155411_167659376600864_1630871_n


3 Steps Action Plan

 

eng-front-page english-back-page

Tamil-front-pagetamil-back-page


இனி என்ன செய்ய வேண்டும்

களமாடும் மாணவர்களுக்கு ஒரு கனிவான வேண்டுகோள் – சீதையின் மைந்தன்


கச்சதீவு இந்தியாவின் சொத்து

alt
கச்சத் தீவின் பரப்பளவு 285 ஏக்கர்கள் 20 சென்ட் ஆகும். கச்சத் தீவு தமிழகத்தின் ராமேஸ்வரத்திலிருந்து 17 கி.மீ. தூரத்தில் உள்ளது. அதாவது, சென்னை சென்ட்ரலுக்கும், தாம்பரத்துக்கும் உள்ள தூரத்தை விட குறைவானது. கடலோர எல்லை, நாட்டிக்கல் மைல் (NAUTICAL MILES) அளவு கொண்டு சர்வதேச அரங்கில் கணக்கிடப்படுகிறது. அதன்படி கச்சத் தீவு ராமேஸ்வரத்திலிருந்து 12 நாட்டிக்கல் மைல் அளவுக்கும் குறைவான தூரத்தில் அமைந்துள்ளது. முந்தைய காலத்தில் ராமநாதபுரம் அரசின் கட்டுப்பாட்டில் இருந்த 8 தீவுகளில் கச்சத் தீவும் ஒன்றாகும்.alt

1480 ம் ஆண்டில் ஏற்ப்பட்ட கடல் கொந்தளிப்பால் பெரும் புயல் ஏற்ப்பட்டு வங்கக் கடலில் ராமேஸ்வரம் தீவும் அதை சுற்றி 11 தீவுகளும் உண்டாயின.

01 ராமேஸ்வரம்

02 குந்துகால்

03 புனவாசல்

04 முயல் தீவு

05 பூமரிசான் தீவு

06 முல்லைத் தீவு

07 மணல் தீவு

08 வாலித் தீவு (கச்சத் தீவு)

09 அப்பா தீவு

10 நல்ல தண்ணீர் தீவு

11 உப்பு தண்ணீர் தீவு

12 குடுசடி தீவு

 

alt
கோடிக்கணக்கான இந்து மதத்தினர் நம்பும் ராமாயண இதிகாசத்தில் ஸ்ரீராமரும், வாலியும் போரிட்ட தீவுதான் கச்சத் தீவு என்ற நம்பிக்கையும் நிலவுகிறது. 23.07.1974-ல் நடைபெற்ற நாடாளுமன்ற விவாதத்தில், அப்போதைய குவாலியரின் நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினராக இருந்த பிற்கால பிரதமர் அடல் பிகாரி வாஜ்பாய் கச்சத் தீவை, ‘வாலி தீவு’ என கூறியுள்ளார்.

ராமநாதபுரம் மாவட்ட அரசு வரலாற்று குறிப்பு 11891ம் பக்கம் 14ல் இதற்கான ஆதாரம் உள்ளது. 1480 ம் ஆண்டு தோன்றிய இத் தீவுகள் யாவும் ராமநாதபுரம் சேதுபதி மன்னர்களுக்கு சொந்தமாக இருந்தன.

1802ம் ஆண்டில் கொண்டுவரப்பட்ட ஜமிந்தாரி நில உரிமைச் சட்டப்படி கச்சத்தீவு ராமநாதபுரம் ராஜாவிற்கு அரசுடமையாக்கப்பட்டது. அதற்கு பிறகு ராமநாதபுரம் ராஜா அவர்கள் அந்த இடத்தை தனி நபர்களுக்கு குத்தகையாக கொடுத்து அவர்கள் மூலமாக பயன் பெற்று இருகின்றனர்.

1905ம் ஆண்டு ராமநாதபுரம் மாவட்டம் தொண்டியை சேர்ந்த சீனி கருப்பன் படையாச்சி என்ற மீனவர் புனித அந்தோனியார் கோயிலைக் கட்டினார். ஒவ்வொரு ஆண்டும் மார்ச் 4ம் நாள் திருவிழா நடக்கும். இதில் தமிழர்கள் யாருடைய அனுமதியும் பெறாமல் செல்லாம். இலங்கை பக்தர்கள் இலங்கை அரசின் அனுமதி பெற்று தான் வரவேண்டும்.

alt
1947 ம் ஆண்டு ஜமீன்தாரி ஒழிப்பு சட்டம் கொண்டு வரும் வரையில் கச்சதீவு சேதுபதி மன்னர்களின் ஆட்சியில் இருந்தது.

இதற்கு 1822 ம் ஆண்டிலிருந்து நிறைய சான்றுகள் உண்டு. கிழக்கிந்திய கம்பெனி 1822ல் இஸ்திமிரர் சனட் என்ற ஒப்பந்தத்தில் ராமநாதபுரம் ராஜாவிடமிருந்து கச்சத்தீவை பயன்படுத்தி கொள்ளும் உரிமை பெற்றது. 69 கடற்கரை ஊர்களும் 8 தீவுகளும் சேதுபதிக்கு உரியது. இந்த 8 தீவுகளில் ஒன்று தான் கச்சத்தீவு. கிழக்கிந்திய கம்பனி இவை யாவற்றையும் பயன்படுத்தி கொள்ள ராஜாவிடம் இருந்து இசைவு பெற்று இருந்தது.

இங்கிலாந்து பேரரசி விக்டோரியாவின் காலத்தில் இலங்கை பற்றி வெளியிடப்பட்ட பொது அறிவிப்பில் இலங்கையின் எல்லையை பற்றி குறிப்பிடும் போது கச்சத்தீவை குறிக்காமலும், ராமநாதபுரம் அரசை பற்றி குறிப்பிடுகையில் கச்சத்தீவு அவருக்கு உரியதென்றும் குறிப்பிடப்பட்டு இருந்தது. இதனை முந்நாளைய இலங்கை அமைச்சரவை செயலாளர் பி. ஈ. பியரிஸ் உறுதிபடுத்தி உள்ளார்.

1947 டிசம்பர் திங்களில் சண்முக ராஜேந்திர சேதுபதியிடமிருந்து வீ. பொன்னுசாமி பிள்ளை, கே.எஸ். மொகம்மது மீர்சா மரைக்காயர் ஆகிய இருவரும் கச்சத்தீவை குத்தகைக்கு எடுத்துள்ளனர். இலங்கையின் பழைய வரலாற்று அவணங்களிலோ, நூல்களிலோ எதிலும் கச்சத் தீவு பற்றிய எந்த விவரமும் இல்லை. இதுவரையில் கச்சத் தீவில் எங்களுக்கு உரிமை உண்டு என்பதற்கான ஆதாரங்களை இலங்கை அரசாங்கம் வெளியிடவும் இல்லை.

டச்சுக்காரர்கள், போர்சுகீசியர்கள் என்று யார் தயாரித்த இலங்கை தேசப்படங்களிலும் கச்சத்தீவு இல்லை. 17 ம் நூற்றாண்டில் பர்நோப் எனும் வரலாற்று ஆய்வாளர் இலங்கைக்கு வந்தார் அவர் இலங்கை தேசப்படம் ஒன்றை உருவாக்கினார். அதிலும் கச்சத்தீவு இல்லை.

alt
1857 – 61 ம் ஆண்டுகளில் இலங்கை தேசப்படங்களை வெளியிட்ட ஜே.ஆரோஷ்மிக் மற்றும் டெண்னன்ட் ஆகியோரும் இலங்கை தேசப்படத்தில் கச்சத்தீவை சேர்த்து வெளியிடவில்லை.

1920 ம் ஆண்டில் கச்சத் தீவு எங்களுக்குத் தான் சொந்தம் என்று இலங்கை அரசு கூற ஆரம்பித்தது. இந்தியா 1956ம் ஆண்டிற்குப் பின்னால் தன்னுடைய கடல் எல்லை கோட்டை 3 கடல் மைல்களில் இருந்து 6 கடல்மைல்களாக விரிவுப்படுத்தியது. அத்துடன் மீன்பிடிக்கும் உரிமையை 100 கடல் மைல்கள் தூரத்திற்கு விரிவுபடுத்தியது. கச்சத்தீவை கைப்பற்ற இந்தியா எடுக்கும் முயற்சி என்று இதனை இலங்கை அரசு கருதி போட்டியாக 1970ல் அதே போன்ற ஒரு அறிவிப்பை இலங்கை வெளியிட்டது.

1973ம் ஆண்டு அன்றைய பிரதமரான இந்திராகாந்தி இலங்கை சென்றார். 1974ம் ஆண்டு இலங்கை அதிபர் சிறிமாவோ பண்டார நாயகே இந்தியா வந்தார். இந்திராவும், சிறிமாவோவும் நடத்திய பேச்சு வார்த்தையில் தமிழகத்தை கேட்காமலே கச்சத்தீவு கை மாறியது.

28.06.1974-ல் கச்சத் தீவை இந்தியா இலங்கைக்கு தாரை வார்த்து, அந்த ஒப்பந்தத்தில் இந்தியா மற்றும் இலங்கை பிரதமர்கள் கையெழுத்திட்டனர். ஆனாலும், ‘தமிழக மீனவர்கள் கச்சத் தீவை ஒட்டி மீன் பிடித்துக் கொள்ளலாம். மீன் பிடிக்கும் வலைகளை கச்சத் தீவில் உலர வைக்கலாம், ஒய்வு எடுத்துக்கொள்ளலாம். இது தவிர, கச்சத்தீவில் உள்ள புனித அந்தோணியார் ஆலய ஆண்டு திருவிழாவில் கலந்து கொள்ளலாம் எனும் உரிமை தமிழகத்திற்கு உள்ளது’ என்றெல்லாம் விளக்கமளித்து, அப்போது தமிழக மக்களை சமாதானப்படுத்தியது அப்போதைய மத்திய காங்கிரஸ் அரசு.

altஇது தொடர்பான விவாதம் 23.07.1974 அன்று நாடாளுமன்றத்தில் நடந்தபோது அதில் பேசிய அப்போதைய வெளியுறவுத் துறை அமைச்சா; ஸ்வரன்சிங், “ 1921-ல் பிரிட்டிஷ் ஆட்சியில் மீன்பிடி எல்லை (FISHERY LINE) வகுக்கப்பட்டு கச்சத் தீவின் மேற்குப் பகுதியில் இந்திய மீனவா;களும், கிழக்குப் பகுதியில் இலங்கை மீனவர்களும் மீன் பிடித்து வந்துள்ளனர். இலங்கைக்கு அருகே உள்ளது கச்சத் தீவு. இலங்கைக்கும் கச்சத் தீவுக்கும் இடையே உள்ள தூரத்தை விட இந்தியாவுக்கும் கச்சத் தீவுக்கும் இடையே உள்ள தூரம் அதிகம்” என்று பல்வேறு விளக்கங்களைக் கொடுத்து, கச்சத் தீவு தாரை வார்க்கப்பட்டதற்கு சப்பைக் கட்டு கட்டினார்.

1976ம் ஆண்டு ஒப்பந்தம் (இரு நாடுகளின் அதிகாரிகளுக்கு இடையே மீன்பிடி உரிமை பற்றிய கடிதப் போக்குவரத்து நடந்தது. அந்த கடிதங்களே 1976 மார்ச் மாதம் ஒப்பந்தமாக அங்கீகரிக்கப்பட்டது) கச்சத் தீவு பகுதிக்கு தமிழக மீனவர்கள் செல்லவும் கூடாது. மீன் பிடிக்கவும் கூடாது. கச்சத்தீவு அந்தோனியார் கோயில் திருவிழாவிற்கு மக்கள் செல்லகூடாது என்று முற்று புள்ளி வைத்தே விட்டது.

1974ம் ஆண்டு ஆகஸ்ட் 21லிருந்து இன்றுவரை நாம் தீர்மானம் நிறைவேற்றி கொண்டே இருக்கிறோம்.சீன ராணுவம் கச்சத் தீவை தனது தளமாக பயன்படுத்த இலங்கை அனுமதித்துள்ளது என செய்திகள் வருகின்றன. அதன்படி பார்த்தால் கச்சத் தீவை நாம் மீட்காவிட்டால் எதிர்காலத்தில் இந்தியாவிற்கு – குறிப்பாக தமிழகத்திற்கு பெரும் அச்சுறுத்தலாக கச்சத்தீவு இருக்கப் போகிறது

1971 முதல் 1974 ஆம் ஆண்டு வரை அந்தோணியார் விழாவின் போது இலங்கை முப்படைகளம் அங்கு முகாமிட்டன. altஇராணுவ ஹெலிகாப்டர் கச்சத் தீவில் வட்டமிட்டுக் கொண்டேயிருந்தது. போர்க் கப்பல் கஜபாகு கச்சத் தீவில் நிறுத்தப்பட்டிருந்தது.
இந்தியா கடுமையான எதிர் நடவடிக்கைகள் எதையும் எடுக்கவில்லை; தன் படையையோ அதிகாரிகளையோ அனுப்பி உரிமையை நிலைநாட்டவில்லை. தன் நாட்டுத் தீவு என்ற அக்கறையே இல்லாமல் இருந்தது. பாகிஸ்தான், சீனப் போரில் பல்லாயிரக்கணக்கான சதுர மைல் பூமிகளை அந்நாட்டிடம் இழந்து இன்னும் அதை மீட்க முடியாத  இந்திய அரசு – மேற்கு வங்கத்தின் பெருவாரியை வங்க நாட்டுக்கும், அந்தமான் நிக்போபர் அருகில் உள்ள கொக்கோ தீவை பர்மாவிற்கும் தானம் செய்த இந்திய அரசு அதுபோல் கச்சத் தீவைத் தாமாகவே இலங்கைக்குக் கொடுக்க முடிவு செய்து விட்டது. வினோபா பாவேயின் “பூமிதானம்” என எண்ணிவிட்டனர்.
இந்திய அரசு கச்சத் தீவைக் “கண்டுகொள்ளாததால்” இலங்கை எளிதாக ஆக்கிரமிப்புச் செய்தது. இந்திய மண்ணில் அடிக்கடி கால் வைத்தது.
alt“ஒரு நாட்டின் ஒரு பகுதியை மற்றொரு நாடு தன்னுடைய பகுதி என்று அறிவித்தால், அதனை உரிய நாடு வலிமையாக எதிர்க்காமல் அமைதியாக இருந்தால், அது ஆக்கிரமித்த நாட்டின் உரிமையை வாய்ச் சொல்லில் சொல்லாமல் ஒப்புக் கொண்டது என்றே பொருள்” – என்பதுதான் சர்வதேசச் சட்டமாகும்.
இலங்கை முப்படையினர் கச்சத் தீவில் முகாம் இட்டும் இந்திய அரசு எந்த நடவடிக்கையும் எடுக்காமல் விட்டதால் கச்சத் தீவு இலங்கைக்கு உரியது என்று ஒப்புக் கொண்டது என்பதே பொருளாகும். இது இந்திய அரசின் மாபெரும் தவறாகும். தமிழகம் அவற்றைக் கண்டு மவுனம் காத்தது அதைவிடப் பெரிய தவறு.

 

Source: sikams.com

Requesting Donation for Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement

As our KRM – Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement is badly in need of money for our further
movements such as

  • Conducting seminars in all district head quarters and major cities in India,
  • Forming wings like
    • Fishermen wing (KRM),
    • Students wing (KRM),
    • Youth wing (KRM),
    • Tamizh societies wing (KRM),
  • Impleading ourselves in supreme court case.
  • To lobby all the non congress state government rulers to pass resolutions to retrieve katchatheevu island in their respective assemblies, awareness tours, etc etc.,

We request all the tamizh’s and patriots to donate liberally to the following bank account

Name : B. Dhakshinamoorthy

SB A/C. No : 129104000030384

IFSC Code : IBKL0000129

Bank : IDBI LTD

Branch : Saidapet, Chennai – 600015

 -Seethaiyin Maindhan
Prime Co-oridnator
Katchatheevu Retrieval Movement
Phone: 9884227293
(http://katchatheevu.com/)


KATCHATHEEVU IS OURS – CONCRETE EVDIENCES

Even during the reign of ancient Tamil Sangam Kings, reign of King Sethupathy of Ramanathapuram, reign of East India Company, during the time of direct British rule and even after independence, Katchatheevu island remained with Tamilnadu. There are many more plentiful evidence and data to establish that Katchatheevu Island and the surround fish rich Sea belong to Tamilnadu.

EVIDENCES :
1. During A.D.cialis online 1605, the clan of Ramanathapuram Sethupathy King was established by the Madurai Nayaks, incorporating 69 coastal villages and 7 Islands, of which Katchatheevu Island is one of the Island.
2. A copper plate plaque issued by King Koothan Sethupathy who ruled Ramanathapuram during the years 1622- 1635, depicts that the Sea upto Talaimannar belonged to Sethupathy Kings.
3. Coronation flowers which adorn the Goddess, Malai Valar Kathali Ammai of Rameswaram are grown in Katchatheevu Island. Similarly, cattle’s that are donated to the Temple are cared for in Katchatheevu Island and the Milk and other items needed for pooja are brought only from Katchatheevu island.
4. In the Kingdom of Ramanathapuram, there existed a separate account section to maintain and audit the accounts of Kathatheevu Island.
5. In the plaque issued to Jamindarine Mangaleswari Natchiyar, who took over after the period of Ramanathapuram King Muthuramalinga Sethupathy (who was imprisoned for a long period for having opposed the British), it is clearly mentioned that Katchatheevu Island belonged to Ramanathapuram Zamin.
6. There is a clear document evidencing leasing out Katchatheevu Island to East India Company by Ramanathapuram Sethupathy in the year 1822.
7. In Queen Victoria’s 1858 Proclamation whereby the powers got transferred to British Rule from East India Company, reference is made that Katchatheevu Island belong to Ramanathapuram Zamin.
8. P.P.Peris, who during the years of British Rule in 1936- 40, served as an Assistant Draftsman and later became a Ministerial Secretary after Sri Lanka attained independence, on 08.05.1966, made the following statement, confirming that Katchatheevu Island belonged to Ramanathapuram Kings. He says, “During the years 1936-40, when I served as Assistant Draftsman in the Land Survey Department, I was directed to survey the district boundaries of Ceylon. Therefore, I perused all records, documents, historical evidences and the Queen Victoria’s proclamation, by which 1 found that Katchatheevu Island belonged to King Sethupathy, Therefore I drew the Northern District of Ceylon delineating Katchatheevu Island.” This statement issued by the Ministerial Secretary on 08.05.1966, was widely reported in the then Daily Mirror published from Sri Lanka and thereafter reported in Indian Express in India.
9. There is a Registered Document (Registration No. 510/1880, Book 1, Volume 16) evidencing the fact that on 23.06.1880, eight coastal villages and four Island, including the Katchatheevu Island, belong to the Ramanathapuram Sethupathy’s were given in lease by the District Collector, Madurai jointly to one Abdul Kadar Marakayar and Muthusamy Pillai.
10. By a document dt.04.02.1885 (Registration No. 134/1885), Muthusamy Pillai, has taken the Katchatheevu Island on an annual lease of Rs.15 per annum from the Estate Manager of Ramanathapuram Sethupathy for the purpose of procuring dye roots.
11. Under a pact entered into between the Dutch and Ramanathapuram Seethupathy during the year 1767, a clause was incorporated to permit ail those residing Ramanathapuram Zamin can always visit Katchtheevu Island.
12. Baskara Sethypathy of Ramanathapuram, has assigned a portion of Katchatheevu island to Poet Sundaram.
13. When Zamindari Abolition Act came into force, Katchatheevu Island is mentioned as 285 Acres of Government Poromboke land in Ramanathapuram Village.
14. In the Ramanathpuram Gazetteer, issued by S.A.Viswanathan, Assistant Revenue Officer, Madras (then Tamiinadu was called Madras) on 11.11.1958, in Register No.68, Katchatheevu Island is shown as comprised in Ramanathapuram Village.
15. On 01.07.1913, when few Islands were taken on a 15 year lease by the Government of Madras Presidency from Ramanathapuram Sethupathy, Katchatheevu Island is mentioned by the Secretary to Government, as a territory belonging to Ramanathapuram Zamin and situate on the North East of Ramanathapuram.
16. In the year 1947, one K.M.Mohammed Merasa Marakayar, took the Katchatheevu Island on lease from Ramanathapuram Sethupathy. In the documents which was then executed, Katchatheevu Island was shown as a territory situated between Talaimannar and Danuskodi and belonging to Ramanathapuram Suzerainty.
17. In the Land Document Register issued by the Government, firstly issued in the year 1957 and again reprinted and issued as an updated publication, in the year 1966, at page 107, Katchatheevu Island is mentioned as a uninhabited territory belonging to Danuskodi.
18. Between the years 1913 and 1928, many Islands including the Katchatheevu Island were taken on lease from Ramanathapuram Sethupathy Kings and were again sublet to fishermen.
19. On several occasion the Sethupathy Kings, have themselves directly leased out many islands including the Katchatheevu Island to fishermen. There are records to show that fishermen from Tondi and Nambuthazhai have taken such leases.
20. In all the Indian Land Survey Records issued between the years 1874 and 1956, Katchatheevu Island is depicted as an Indian Territory alone. The Indian Land Survey Department has mentioned Katchatheevu Island as, measuring 285 Acres and 20 cents comprised in Survey No.1250,
21. In all reports published in several medias, Katcha theevu Island is mentioned as belonging to Ramanathapuram Sethupathy. Thus it is very clear that Katchatheevu Island is a Tamil Soil, and it is a Tamil Land. Katchatheevu Island and the seas surrounding it belonged to Tamils through several generations. More particularly, it is the tamil fishermen community which enjoyed the land over the years. It is this ancestral Tamil home land which was ceded to Sri Lanka by Indira Gandhi in the year 1974. While gifting away the land, Indira Gandhi pointed out that Katchatheevu Island is being ceded not on the basis of records but for other political reasons. What ever be the reason for ceding the Katchatheevu Island, but it is ultimately our Tamil fisher womenfolk numbering above 500 who were widowed by the Sinhala Navy Goons, Retrieval of Katchatheevu Island, alone will put an end to the suffering of our fisher brethren.


Discussion Meeting 16-12-2011

 


Katchatheevu – The Betrayed Indian Territory (Video)

The Betrayed Indian Territory

Katchatheevu Namathe – Documentary DVD


Katchatheevu Namathe – CD release

Photo Gallery
 
Video Part 1
 
Video Part 2
 
Video Part 3
 
 

Siraku TV Interview

 

Part 1

 

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4


Parliament debates and events taken place on 23.07.1974 on 1974 Agreement.

Mr. SPEAKER: Now, Shri Swaran Singh will make a statement…..

SHRI MADHU LIMAYE (Banka) :
On a point of order. 1
had already given you notice, SHRI K. MANOHARAN (Madras North): Each Member
must be given a proper opportunity to express his views.

SHRI SEZHIYAN (Kumbakonam):
Before the Hon. Minister makes his statement, I want to submit that we should have been consulted and the House should have been taken into confidence before they entered into this unholy agreement for the surrender of territory by India. While we are anxious that friendly and cordial relations should be maintained with Sri Lanka, the legal and constitutional proprieties against the interests of the country since it amounts to pure surrender of our territory without going through any of the norms. This is an unholy and disgraceful act of statesmanship unworthy of any Government. Therefore, We do not want to associate ourselves with the statement that is going to be made by the Hon. Minister, and we want to disassociate ourselves by walking out of the House.

SHRI K. MANOHARN :
Please allow one Member from each party to express his views. We have decided to stage a walk-out, and therefore, before we walk out we want to tell you the reasons which have prompted us to walk out. The agreement entered into between Sri Lanka Government and the Government of India is anti-national and unpatriotic; it is the worst agreement ever signed by any civilised country of the world. 1 do not like to insult or hurt the feelings of either the people of Sri Lanka or the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka….

MR. SPEAKER : Hon. Members are going to have a debate on , foreign affairs when they can raise all these points.

SHRI K. MANOHARAN ; I must be permitted to speak now. Through this unholy agreement, the Sri Lanka Prime Minister has emerged as victor and the Prime Minister of India as a pathetic vanquished. It is an assault on the integrity of the country. In view of this, we have decided to stage a walk out and we are walking out.

SHRI P.K.MOOKIAH THEVAR (Ramanathapuram) :
Katchativu forms part of my constituency. You are acting like a dictator. You are speaking like a democrat but at the same time you are acting like a dictator. The whole life of thousands of fishermen….. Today the Ceylon government has moved their forces, their military towards that island. Thousands of mechanized boats were stopped; movements were restricted. Their lives are in danger. You have simply betrayed. You have no sympathy and courtesy to consult those people. You are thinking of it as a part of Tamil Nadu. Do not think it as part of Tamil Nadu. It is going to be the base for a torture war. It is going to be the base and challenge the life of the nation. I have to warn all these things because in the past it has been the tradition of our Governement to give bhoodan of the northern borders. (Interruptions)

Mr. SPEAKER: Kindly sit down

SHRI P.K.Mookiah THEVAR :
The division of India has cost the life of Mahatama Gandhi. It is not a part of Tamil Nadu but it is a part of the holy land of India. You are betraying. On behalf of the constituency and on behalf of the Forward Block, 1 walk
out.
SHRI MUHAMMED SHERIFF (Periakulam): Even on the 1st April 1965, 1 produced sufficient records in this House to show that Kachchativu belongs to the Raja of Ramnad. Government has failed to go through those records. 1 was the elected representative of that constituency here previously. It 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 State. We condemn this action of Government and along with my friends, 1 also walk out in protest. (ShriP.K.N.Thevar and Shri Muhanimed Sheriff then left the House).

SHRI P.K. DEO (Kalahandi):
On a point of order, Sir. The statement that the Foreign Minister is going to make deals with cession of Indian territory, in this regard, two important issues are involved. The first is the constitutional issue. Article of the Constitution says: “The territory of India shall comprise
a. the territories of the States;
b. the Union Territories specified in the First Schedule;
and
c. such other territories as may be acquired”.
So, further acquisiton of territory can be accepted, but nowhere does the Constitution provide for cession of even an inch of Indian territory- The Kachchativu controversy was raised only a few years ago by the Ceylonese Government when the Bandaranaike Minister came into power. All the revenue records of the Madras Government corrobo¬rate that Kachchativu was a part of the former Ramnad Zamindary and an integral part of this country. So, under no circumstances the Government has got any power under the Constitution to cede even an inch of our country.
………………………………
………………………………
Sir they cannot consider this country as the zamindari of the congress party. A few days back the Coco Island, which is party of the Andaman group of islands, was ceded to Burma. The question of Beru Bari was raised by the previous speaker. Now has come the question of Kachchativu. If we go on  ceding our territory like this, what will be left of this country? Secondly, it is utter contempt and disrespect shown to this House by not taking the House into confidence and facing us with a fait accompli. The shutting out of the views of the opposition parties in this manner is most anti-democratic. So, 1 would say that the statement which is going to be laid on the Table of the Lok Sabha is not worth the paper on which it has been typed. Therefore, I would submit that the External Affairs Minister should consider these matters and should not lay the statement on the Table of the House. Otherwise, we will be forced to take the extreme step of walking out.

SHRI SEZHIYAN :
But the agreement is unconstitutional.

MR. SPEAKER :
How can we know it?

SHRI ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE:
It is published in newspapers.

MR. SPEAKER:
How can the house be seized of the matter unless the Minister makes a statement?

SHRI ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE:
Can they violate the Constitution?

MR. SPEAKER :
I have given the ruling, the Minister. (At this stage Shri Kachwai tore up some papaers and threw them away). (Some Hon. Members left the House at the stage).

SHRI K. LANKAPPA :
Sir the tearing of papers by an Hon. Member is contempt of the House. I want your ruling on this.
…………………….
…………………….
MR. SPEAKER: My ruling is that tearing of papers is not in keeping with the decorum or dignity of the House.

THE MINISTER OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (SHRI SWARAN SINGH) :
Over the years, since our independence, there have been a number of questions and discussions in the House regarding the Island of Kachchativu. Government have of course fully shared this interest and concern for arriving at an early and amicable solution of this long-outstanding matter; and I am happy to say that an agreement was signed between the two Prime Minister on 28th June, a copy of which I am laying on the table of the House.
The Island of Kachchativu, about 3/4 of a square mile in extent, is situated in the Palk Bay; it is about 10 1/2 miles for the nearest landfall in Sri Lanka and about 12 1/2 miles from the nearest Indian shore. The Palk Bay, which constitutes historic waters of Indian and Sri Lanka, is some 18 miles wide at its entrance through the Paik Straits, and has an average width of some 28 miles.
The issue of deciding Indian and Sri Lanka claims to Kachchativu was closely connected with determining the boundary line between India and Sri lanka in the waters of the Palk Bay. The entire quetion of the maritime boundary in the historic waters of the Palk Bay required urgently to be settled, keeping in view the claims of the two sides, historical evidence, legal practice and precedent and in the broader context of our growing friendly relations with Sri Lanka. Kachchativu has always been an uninhabited island. Neither Sri Lanka nor India has had any permanent presence there. During the long colonial period the question whether Kachchativu was part of India or part of Ceylon was frequently 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 pending a final solution to be reached through amicable bilateral efforts.
…………………………
…………………………
I would particularly like to draw the attention of Honourable Memebers to the fact that when two sides have a good arguable case on a particular issue, and the problem cannot be resolved expeditiousiy through bilateral negotiations, there is inevitably an attempt to seek outside intervention by appeal either to the International Court of Justice or to third party arbitration. For our part, we have always been firmly of the view that in any differences with our neighbouring countries, we should seek to resolve them through bilateral discussions without outside interference, on the basis of equality and good will. It is a matter of satisfaction to us that our Prime Minister’s resolve to settle this issue through direct bilateral talks met with an equaly warm response from the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, and the agreement could be reached in an atmosphere of friendship and mutual understanding. Exhaustive research of Historical and other records was made by our experts on Kachchativu and every available piece of evidence collected from various record offices in India, such as in Tamil Nadu, Goa and Bombay, as well as abroad in British and Dutch archives. An intensive examination of evidence and exchange of views took place, specially during the past year, between senior officials of the two Governments. This question of Kachchativu, for the reasons I have just explained, had necessarily to be dealt with as part of the broader question of the boundary in the Palk Bay so as to eliminate the possibility of any further disputes on similar matters in these historic waters.
On the basis of dispassionate examination of the historical records and other evidence, and keeping in mind the legal principles and also keeping in mind our policy and principle of peaceful settlement of disputes, I feel confident that the Agreement demarcating the maritime boundary in the Palk Bay, will be considered as fair, just and equitable to both countries.
At the same time, I wish to remind the Hon’ble Members that in concluding this Agreement the rights of fishing, pilgrimage and navigation, which is a victory of mature staternanship, a victory in the cause of friendship and cooperation in the area. A potential major irritant in relations between the two countries, which had remained unresolved over the years, has now been removed, and both countries can now concentrate on the exploitation of economic and other resources in these, now well-defined, waters and generally on intensifying cooperation between themselves in various fields. The Agreement marks an important step in further strengthening the close ties that bind India and Sri Lanka. (The provisions of the Agreement are given in Appendix I).

SHRI M. KALYANASUNDARAM (Tiruchirapalli) :
Sir, while my party welcomes the Agreements reached between Sri Lanka and India, there are problems to come up during the implementation of the Agreement. So far, our fishermen had a right to go even beyond Kachchativu, fish and come back. The Hon. Minister says that these rights are fully protected. But there are problems which we would like our Government to take up with Sri Lanka and seek their discussion on this statement, I have given notice of a motion. I would request you to allow a discussion on that.

MR. SPEAKER:
The general debate on foreign affairs is coming up next week.

SHRI DINEN BHATTACHARYA (Serampore) :
1 want to seek one clarification. In the statement he has metioned that Kachchativu has always been an uninhabited island. But an Hon. Member had said that it was within his constituency. If 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?


SHRI M. KALYANASUNDARAM :
The Tamil Nadu Government has a grievance that it has not been consulted properly. May I know what is the actual fact in regard to that? I also want to know the details about the protection given with regard to fishing rights.

SHRI SWARAN SINGH:
The Hon Member would no doubt be aware that in the year 1921 when both Sri Lanka and India were under British rule, fishery line had been decided by the British Governement because they had control over both Sri Lanka as weli as India. 1 am sure that the Hon, Member knows that the 1921 fishery line was aline which was about three or three and a half miles west of the Kachchativu. That is, to the western side of the fishery line was the exclusive fishery right of the Indian citizens and to the east of that was the right of Sri Lanka fishermen. But in spite of that division, the fishermen generally were free to fish even round about Kachchativu and they also used the Kachchativu island for drying their nets. As would be known to the House there is no fresh water available there. Mostly they used it for spreading their nets and trying to dry the nets, etc., About the traditional rights, if the Hon. Members goes through the terms of the Agreement, a copy of which has been placed on the Table of the House, he will get the answer because it is mentioned there that, although Sri Lanka’s claim to sovereignty over Kachchativu has been recognised, the traditional navigation rights exercised by India and Sri Lanka in each other’s water will remain unaffected (interruption).

MR. SPEAKER:
Later on we may have debate on this, but now I am not allowing any more.

MR. KUREEL.
Source: Lok sabha Debates, July 23,1974, Cols. 186-201.


KATCHATHEEVU AND THE INDIAN TAMILS OF SRILANKA

The Congress Rulers never considered Tamils as Indians and Tamil Nadu a part of India. Ten Years earlier to the Indira Gandhi – Srimavo traitorous agreement of 1974, during the year 1964, Sastri the then Prime Minister of India Made a betrayal agreement with the same lady Srimavo Pandaranaike which made lakhs and lakhs of Indian Tamils of Srilanka Stateless. These Tamils were taken to Ceylon under the protective umbrella of British since 19th Century and they formed a bulk labour which turned the malaria infested forests of Srilanka in to a smiling plantations of tea which sustained the Srilankan economy up to modern times. Under the British Rule these Indian Tamils of Srilanka enjoyed the same legal status what the Singhalese and the Srilankan Tamils enjoyed. After Independence, the Srilankan Government declared that all the Srilankan Indian Tamils are stateless by passing an act by name The Ceylon Citizenship Act 1948.

Instead of warning the Srilankan Government to withdraw the above act, the Congress Government went on negotiating with Srilanka on this issue and finally Sastri accepted to get 5-25 lakhs of Srilankan Indian Tamils back to India out of 9.75 lakhs of Indian Tamils in Srilanka. It is to be noted that 90% of them did not want to return to India because they had been there in Srilanka Since 19th Century.

At that time Shir. C. Raja Gopalachari, once a Prominent leader of congress Party righty echoed the feelings of Tamils as follows. “Why should nearly a million of children and grand children born in Ceylon to parents who toiled and sweated for Ceylon and who had gone there from south India and settled down in the plantations be disentitled to be citizens of Ceylon? Why should a single child born in Ceylon and desiring to be in Ceylon and be a working citizen thereof be turned to wander as homeless refugees in India?”

As usual the congress Rulers ignored all objections and protests. Ultimately lakhs and lakhs joined families of Indian Tamils in Srilanka departed each family in to two or more and 60% of them were forced to return to India as refugees. Thereafter, the Srilankan Tamil refugees in India and their blood relations in Srilanka used to meet and recall their memories once in a year at Katchatheevu during the “Antoniar Festival” without Visa or any other travel documents. After Indira Gandhi gifted Katchatheevu to Srimavo for the reasons described in the previous chapters the Srilankan Government once for all locked the Antoniar Temple and stopped the Antoniar Festival Since 1978 and detained the Pilgrims to visit katchatheevu.

Thus the meeting opportunity of the Srilankan Tamil Refugees in India and the Indian Tamils in Srilanka once in a year at Katchatheevu was buried because of the ceding of Katchatheevu to Srilanka through the traitorous, betrayal and unpatriotic agreement made by Indira Gandhi during the year 1974.

What remarkable here is that Shri. K. Kamaraj the Then All India Congress party leader who made Sastri as Prime Minister after Nehru and Indira as the Prime Minister after Sastri is a Tamil.


THE DICTATORIAL ACT OF CONGRESS AND THE LOSS OF KATCHATHEEVU ISLAND

India is a country with different rationalities people of which have formulated a Constituion to protect the interest of each and every citizen. It is no less an act of betrayal, and anti national, when a territory belonging to people of a particular nationality being ceded to a foreign power, that too without obtaining the consent of that people. This could be summarized as a dictatorial act. Katchatheevu Island was ceded to Sri Lanka by the then Congress Government through the 1974 agreement, which agreement had not even been ratified by the Indian parliament. Traditionally Katchatheevu Island had been the territory of Tamils. The foregoing chapters dealt in detail the Tamils traditional right over Katchatheevu Island. The Sinhalese were often found staking a claim over Katchatheevu Island. During 1920, the Sinhalese made a claim with the British rulers over the Katchatheevu Island. Even then Katchatheevu Island continued to remain a territory of Tamils.

After independence, during 1951 and again in 1954, Sri Lanka laid a claim over Katchatheevu Island. Dudly Senanayake and John Kothalawala were the Srilankan Prime Ministers, and Jawaharlal Nehru was the then Indian Prime Minister. Jawaharlal Nehru did not show any interest over Katchatheevu Island. This emboldened the Sri Lankans to conduct a Military exercise in Katchatheevu Island in 1955. When this was raised in Parliament, Jawaharlal Nehru would only say that the issue is being analyzed. In the mean time Sri Lanka agreed to wait for a final decision on Katchatheevu Island and announced “postponement of military exercises” till then. Again during 1968 the issue on Katchatheevu Island was raised in Parliament. Mrs.lndira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister, following the footsteps of her father Jawaharlal Nehru did not pay much attention and replied that she is awaiting details on Katchatheevu Island from the Government of Tamilnadu. During the same period, on 02.03.1968, the Samyuktha Socialist Part, which had only 2 members in the Tarnilnadu assembly moved an adjournment motion on the issue of Katchatheevu Island, Pulavar Govindan, the then Deputy Speaker, (who was then in Chiar) said that the issue of Katchatheevu Island is an external affairs issue to be addressed by the Central Government.

The DMK had 138 members in the Assembly at that time. This is the manner in which the DMK, once a patriarch of separate Dravidian land, viewed the issue of Katchatheevu Island. In 1974, the Prime Ministers of both the nations deliberated on handing over Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka. On 26.06.1974, Mrs.Bandaranayke, signed the agreement in Colombo and on 28.06.1974. Mrs. Indira Gandhi signed the fateful agreement. On 23.07.1974 a report on this agreement was read over in the Parliament. Till date the agreement has not been ratified by the parliament. Mrs. Indira Gandhi, fairly admitted that Katchatheevu Island was ceded for political reasons and not on documentary evidences.

It is worth mentioning that during the Indo China War and Indo Pak war, Sri Lanka had always supported China and Pakistan. In reciprocation of Sri Lanka’s support during the Bangladesh War, Pakistan gave two planes to Sri Lanka. It is widely reported that after the 1971 Indo Pak War, Pakistan sought to establish an Air base in Sri Lanka and this was vehemently opposed by India. On its part Sri Lanka demanded that, to keep Pakistan in bay, Katchatheevu Island be ceded to it. Mrs. Indira Gandhi is reported to have accepted to this barter. This is the political reason that is widely reported to be the reason for ceding Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka. Considering the stature of Mrs.Indira Gandhi and the political power which she wielded during that time, Mrs, Indiara Gandhi was in the height of her political career and it in the next year viz., 1975 she declared Emergency, it is rather doubtful whether Mrs.Indira Gandhi would have yielded to the dictates of Mrs.Bandaranayake.

Mrs.Bandaranayake is considered very close to the Nehru family. Even during the days of Mr.Bandaranayake, there was close relationship between Jawaharlal Nehru family and Bandaranayake family. After, the death of Mr.Bandaranayake, Mrs. Bandaranayake became the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka. She had the distinction of being the first Women Prime Minister in the World. The relationship between her and Nehru continued well, till the death of Jawaharlal Nehru. Thereafter, the relationship continued with Mrs.Indira Gandhi. Although, Mrs.Bandaranayake had the distinction of being the World’s first Women Prime Minister, she saw her power fading away at home. So there was a necessity to rejuvenate, which was accomplished by ceding Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka. While, Mrs. Indira Gandhi weighed the family relationship more, she failed to realize the trouble ahead for the Tamil Indian Fishermen. In the end, Katchatheevu Island was ceded to satisfy personal desires.

“Katchatheevu was the most typical case of a personal equation playing the role of diplomacy. When the negotiations had virtually failed, and the Indian official delegation was pressurizing Indra Gandhi not to give up India’s claim on the islet, Srimavo Bandaranaika made a personal appeal to Indira Gandhi to come to her rescue as it would otherwise spell political disaster for her. Indira Gandhi appreciated Mrs. Srimao Bandaranaike’s predicament and manipulated the situation in such a way that it became a fait accompli even before the Indian delegation could react. Srimavo Bandaranaike remembered this gesture as late as 1990 with immense gratitude.
Prof. Partha Gosh in his book ” Ethnicity versus Nationalism.


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 acknowledge this basic fact and transcending all its Constitutional authority, the Centre has allowed Sri Lanka to exercise its suzerainty 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 responsible for this malady, the DMK which occupies a predominant 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 Katchatheevu Island, the External Affairs Minister Mr.S.M. Krishna, asserted the following as his reply which are in fact false statement:

S.M. Krishna on the right

“Katchatheevu Island belong to Sri Lanka”
“What had been given is given”
“The agreement is solemn”
“It cannot be abrogated”
“It is not possible to provide security to the fishermen who transcend the borders”
“Sri Lanka is our friendly Nation”

What Mr. S.M. Krishna is referring to as solemn is the Agreement of the year 1974. This agreement can at the most be termed as a half printed currency note. It requires patience and endurance to understand the issue of Katchatheevu Island. The Sea between India and Sri Lanka is divided into Three Sectors. 1. The sea between Rameswaram and Talaimannar up to Adams BridgSe, which constitute the Palk Strait. (Katchatheevu Island is situated in this Sector at a distance of 11 nautical miles North East from Rameswaram and 18 nautical miles North West from Sri Lanka’s Talaimannar).
2. The Gulf of Mannar which is situated south of Adams Bridge.
3. The remaining portion excluding the Palk Strait and Gulf of Mannar the Bay of Bengal.
The Government of India and Sri Lanka have executed two agreements one during 1974 and another during 1976, over these three Sectors.

THE FIRST AGREEMENT :
The then Indian Prime Minister Mrs.lndira Gandhi and the then Sri Lankan President Mrs.Bandara Naickae executed the first ever agreement on Katchatheevu Island, in the year 1974, which amongst other things, primarily dealt with demarcating the sea boundary around Palk Strait which comprises the Island of Katchatheevu. This agreement also dealtwith the rights of the respective nations over the demarcated area.

THE SECOND AGREEMENT :
The second agreement was entered into in the year 1976, between the foreign Secretaries of both the nations. It covered the remaining area viz., the Bay of Bengal and Gulf of Mannar, which were hitherto not covered in the earlier 1974 agreement. This agreement dealt with the rights of the respective nations over these sectors. Both the 1974 and 1976 agreements are independent of each other and they deal with two different sectors in the Sea. The covenants and substance of both these agreements are entirely different. Both these agreements are often mistaken as pertaining to one and the same issue and this confusion serves as an asset to the opponent while it is a malady to us. Before venturing to understand the 36 year long continued sufferings of our Tamil fishermen, we should first clear ourselves of our doubt in this issue. The 1974 agreement signed by leaders of both the nations and which is vehemently relied on by Mr.S. M.Krishna, requires an in-depth study.

THE 1974 INDO SRILANKAN MARITIME BOUNDARY AGREEMENT :
This agreement consists of VIII Articles. Article I, deals with demarcating the Maritime Boundary over Palk Straits which comprises the Katchatheevu Island. The principle of Equi-Distance demarcation, normally followed in International treaties was not followed, but instead the demarcation was carried on with a sole object of forgoing Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka. As such the Maritime Boundary was drawn above Katchatheevu Island at its West.
If the principle of Equi-Distance demarcation was followed, the Maritime Boundary would have fallen to the East of Katchatheevu Island and the Island would be well within the Indian Maritime Boundary.

The United States did not agree to this demarcation, which did not follow the principle of Equi-Distance demarcation. In a nutshell, the principle of Equi-Distance Demarcation, hundreds of documents from the year 1605 and the uninterrupted possession over the Island over the past thousand years would establish that the Island of Katchatheevu is part of the Indian territory. The fact that Katchatheevu Island is an Indian territory and had been ceded to Sri Lanka is embedded in Article V of the agreement which deals with the traditional rights of the Fishermen and Pilgrims to go over to the Katchatheevu island.

ARTICLE V :
Subject to the Foregoing Indian fishermen and pilgrims will enjoy access to visit Katcha Teevu as hitherto and will not be required by Sri Lanka to obtain travel documents or visa for these purposes. Article VI of the agreement protects the Indian fishing vessels right to venture into and stay in Sri Lankan waters.

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

Article VII deals with effective utilization by both the countries of Gas and other mineral resources that may be discovered in this Sector. Although, this agreement include ceding Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka, in effect this agreement upholds and safeguards the traditional rights of our fishermen over this sector of the Sea, which include Island of Katchatheevu and the area surrounding it. The Island of Katchatheevu had remained within the suzerainty of both the Nations. When two sovereign nations exercise their suzerainty over a land or Island, such joint exercise of power is termed a Condominium. International Law permits exercise of such suzerain power by two or more nations over rivers, Seas and the land mass abutting the sea. The exercise of joint suzerain power by England and France since 1934 over Candon and Endenbury is a best example. The 1974 Indo Sri Lankan Pact, is based on this principle of joint exercise of suzerain power and not a complete ceding of territory as it is being portrayed by Mr.S.M.Krishna.

Even then the act of foregoing the territory of Island of Katchatheevu by Indira Gandhi is an act contrary to the Constitution of India. The Indian Constitution does not permit nor does it authorize any person to cede the country’s territory to any other Nation.

In 1958 when the village of Berubari was to be ceded to Pakistan, the then Indian President make a reference to the Supreme Court, under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution of India, seeking its view on the constitutionality of ceding the territory. The Supreme Court constituted an 8 member Bench, which after much deliberation, advised the Union Government, to carry out necessary amendments to Article 368 before ceding the territory. Accordingly, the Union Government amended Article 368 and thereafter ceded the territory to Pakistan.

Mrs.Indira Gandhi, who signed the 1974 agreement with Sri Lanka and her other officials as well, are quite aware of the need to obtain a Constitutional sanction before ceding the Island of Katchatheevu. Article VIII of the agreement refers to ratification and exchange of instruments which should take place at the earliest possible time.

ARTICLE VIII :
This agreement shall be subject to ratification. It shall enter into force on the date of exchange of the instruments of the ratification which will take place as soon as possible.
Article VIII of the agreement stipulates obtaining a ratification, which could be done by bringing a suitable amendment to the constitution before enforcing the agreement. No such ratification or sanction has been obtained. As such this agreement has lost its sanction, has become inoperative and unenforceable. The statement of External Affairs Minister Mr. S.M.Krishna, before Parliament, that this agreement cannot be abandoned it a contemptuous statement transcending the Constitution, for which act, the External Affairs Minister, the Prime Minister and his Council of Minister should be held responsible. It is this agreement of the year 1974, which has contributed to killing of nearly 500 Indian Fishermen, permanently disabled 1000 of them and disappearance at the same number.

This agreement which makes a mockery of the Indian Constitution, is according to our External Affairs Minister, Mr.S.M.Krishna, as declared by him before the parliament “a solemn agreement.” Mr.S.M.Krishna and his Ministerial counterparts have failed to remember having taken an oath to protect and preserve the Constitution. The numerous documents in hand, our Constitutional provisions, the covenants in the 1974 agreement, supports our view that India has a suzerain power over the Island of Katchatheevu, and continues to exercise that power and will continue to exercise the power over Katchatheevu and the surrounding Seas. In effect the Indian fishermen too exercise such rights over the Katchatheevu Island and the surrounding Seas. I challenge Mr.S.M.Krishna to defer with me. If he could disprove my statement I am ready to face the gallows. If my statement is upheld, will Mr.S.M.Krishna, amputate his tongue for having repeated a false and disproved statement.


WITNESS TESTIMONY OF TWO TAMILNADU FISHERMEN

Having ceded Katchatheevu Island to Sri Lanka, our Tamilnadu fishermen are facing the wrath of the Sinhala Goons. The following is a tearful testimony narrated by two Tamilnadu fishermen about the atrocities committed on them by the Sri Lankan Navy.

 

Testimony -1:

Oral Testimony of C.Soundar Rajan, (25 years as on 2009) fishermen, resident of Mandapagathur, Karaikal, Puduchery, State.
On 26.10.2006, along with my father Chinnappa and brother Chandrasekar, I ventured out into the Sea near Jagathapattinam in Pudukottai District. We were in possession 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 Sri Lankan Naval boats, firing indiscriminately on us. The first bullet hit me on the right side of my head near the rear side of my left head, resulting in fracture of my nose, backbone and upper jaw. Bullet pellets pierced my right shoulder, right thigh and on the right side of my body. Within seconds after firing on us the Sri Lankan Navy disappeared. I was brought to Thanjavur Hospital, where I was operated upon and bullets  and pellets were removed from my body. Still I have bullets in my brain and Doctors fear that any attempt to remove them will be fatal to me. Now I could hear nothing. I have become deaf. My right hand and leg has become permanently paralyzed. Still I could not breath through my nose and I could breath only through by mouth. In short I am a living dead.

When Nehru Attempted to cede Beru Bari “The Forward Block party severely condemn the attempt of Prime Minister Nehru to cede the Beru Bari region, a part of West Bengal to Pakistan without consulting the west Bengal Government.
It is a wrong proceedings which is against our Constitution as per article 3 of the constitution. I call upon the nation particularly the
people of west Bengal to unite together and prepare for all kinds of Sacrifices to retain Beru Bari within our Indian soil”.
– Muthuramalingathevar in a Press meet at Calcutta on 29/02/1959.

 

Testimony-2 :
Oral Testimony of K.Sekar (aged 45 years, as of 2009) permanent resident of Arcot Thurai, Vedaranyam Taluk,
Nagapattinam District. 28 29 We four of us were fishing near Kodiyakarai. As it is their usual practice, the Sri Lankan Navy came firing indiscriminately. Arumugam who accompanied me was got a bullet struck on his right thigh. Five bullets pierced my right hand above the elbow, as though my right hand had been forcibly cut. Due to this blood profused badly. Having no other option, but to bear with the tragedy, I remained floating in the Sea for three days. Having remained floating in the Sea for three days with severe injuries, my right hand got decayed. I had no other option but to amputate my right hand on my own and throw it into the Sea. These are scenes which are not witnessed even in Cinemas, These two events took place within the territorial waters of India. Since 1983, thousands of similar attacks have taken place against our innocent fishermen. Where did our Indian Navy and Indian Coast Guard went missing when these attacks took place?