(A Review of Sinhala, Tamil, and English newspaper reports that focused on the discourses and opinions emerging on political stages in the north and south about the demands and rights of marginalised communities, including the people of the north and east and plantation sector communities. This is based on a sample of newspapers that were published between 2 and 9 September.)
Sumanthiran expressing support to SJB and reportage in north and south
On 29 and 30 August, India’s National Security Adviser Ajit Doval arrived in Sri Lanka all of a sudden, and met leading presidential candidates, i.e. President Ranil Wickremesinghe, Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) Leader Sajith Premadasa, and National People’s Power (NPP) Leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake. A day later, i.e. on 1 September, Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) Media Spokesperson and Member of Parliament (MP) M.A. Sumanthiran announced that the party had decided to support SJB’s presidential candidate Premadasa. This was, four days before postal voting.
However, with the announcement that former MP and journalist Pakkiyaselvam Ariyanethran is contesting the presidential election as a separate representative of the Tamil people, the southern political arena lost its dream of garnering Tamil votes by giving the Tamil people some promises. Because of that disappointment in the south, southern newspapers did not allocate much space for news about the north’s Tamil candidate or his election campaigns. Instead, all newspapers had tried to exaggerate the emerging rifts between Tamil parties. What is more, south-based newspapers had generously allocated space to portray the fielding of a separate candidate for the Tamil people as a decision that shows weaknesses or failures on the part of Tamil politics.
With the announcement that Sumanthiran had decided to support Premadasa, the south paid more attention to politics in the north. However, that was not in a disappointed manner as before. Instead, they saw it as a reason for celebration.
Sinhala politicians were worrying about losing Tamil votes after Tamil candidate Ariyanethran came forward, and in that context, Sumanthiran expressing support to a south-based, Sinhala presidential candidate and promising to bring Tamil votes, and also the emergence of a controversial situation within the ITAK, were a reason to toast.
That happiness was seen in every south-based Sinhala and English newspaper. On 2 September, the two news stories, i.e. Sumanthiran expressing support to the SJB and that decision resulting in a controversial situation within the ITAK, had been reported as separate front-page stories in almost every newspaper. At the same time, many news stories about Sumanthiran’s decision to support Premadasa had mentioned about the controversial situation within the ITAK. Another notable matter is that, some newspapers that did not consider Sumanthiran’s announcement about supporting Premadasa a special news story had treated the resultant controversial situation within the ITAK as an important news story.
Although both The Daily Mirror and The Daily Morning had on 3 September reported that the decision taken by the ITAK’s Central Committee had resulted in a conflict situation within the party, those reports did not mention that Sumanthiran had decided to support Premadasa.

At the same time, the Ceylon Today, Daily News, Mawbima, Lankadeepa, and Dinamina newspapers had reported that Sumanthiran is supporting SJB’s presidential candidate Premadasa. Those newspapers had also reported that the ITAK does not support Tamil candidate Ariyanethran and had highlighted Sumanthiran’s statement which urges him to step down as a candidate.

This week, south-based newspapers appeared to be publishing exaggerated reports about these two incidents, especially the rifts within the ITAK, with unprecedented enthusiasm.
Certain Sinhala newspapers had ridiculed the confusing status of Tamil politics that prevailed at the time. For example, on 9 September, the Aruna newspaper’s election supplement had published two news stories on the 17th page. One report was about ITAK Leader Mavai Senathirajah expressing confidence in Wickremesinghe. Its headline was “Senathirajah betrays Sajith to take Ranil’s hand.” Another report that was below the initial report had a headline which read “Sumanthiran, who loved Sajith, gives word to Anura.” Both headlines contained some form of satirical implications. In a context where even leading politicians in southern politics change their party in broad daylight and with no shame and when traditional political parties’ existence is facing a risk of collapse, if south-based media institutions paid attention to their bigger issues instead of smaller issues faced by others, they would have been able to understand who should be mocked.

Reports by Tamil newspapers
Meanwhile, on 2 September, north-based Tamil newspapers had also reported the chaotic situation that has emerged in Tamil politics as front-page news. They had used the following headlines:

“The announcement regarding supporting Sajith is not ITAK’s final decision!” – Kaleimurusu
“The Central Committee decision is the party’s collective decision! Satyalingam’s response to Mavai’s claim.” – Kaleimurusu
“ITAK to support Sajith! The Tamil common candidate doesn’t have the party’s backing. He should withdraw!” – Kalaikathir
“Announcement on supporting Sajith is not ITAK’s final decision! Party Leader Mavai Senathirajah informs.” – Thinakaran
“I know nothing about ITAK’s decision! Party Leader Mavai Senathirajah informs.” – Pudiyasuhandiran


On 3 September, the Kaleimurusu and Eelanadu newspapers had published articles on the third and front pages respectively that MP Shritharan, who is currently in London, does not accept the ITAK’s decision.



Tamil newspaper reports published those days showed the complicated situation that had arisen in north-based Tamil politics at the time. As reported by the Kalaikathir newspaper on its seventh page and the Pudisuhandiran newspaper on its sixteenth page on 3 September, northern province fishermen’s association’s representative Annalingam Annarasa had criticised ITAK’s decision to support Premadasa. “We do not necessarily need Sinhala people to destroy us. Our leaders are enough to do that,” he said, adding that the party’s decision will destroy the unity among Tamil people and will divide them.


On 3 September, the Eelanadu newspaper had published an article on the fourth page criticising the ITAK. It read:

“What is ITAK doing? What decision have they made? Have they made the right decision? On what promise has the ITAK, which said that it would support the southern candidate who promises to form a federal government, decided to support Premadasa? What happened to the promises given to the people in the recent past? Who is responsible for them? People are foolish and therefore no need to be responsible to the people? – Is this the ITAK’s position?”
On the one hand, individuals such as Gajendra seem to be thinking that Tamil people can be deceived in the name of Tamil nationality, and on the other hand, is the ITAK promoting a political system that involves making fools of the people? It is the people that should answer the question whether they can be deceived forever.”
At the same time, Tamil newspapers had published pages of articles about Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) MP Selvarajah Gajendran’s allegations that Sumanthiran deceived Tamil people, statements made by pro-Wickremesinghe Tamil MPs in support of Wickremesinghe, statements made by pro-SJB Tamil politicians in support of Premadasa, speeches in support of Ariyanethran, and criticism about ITAK’s decision.


When south-based newspapers had reported only about ITAK’s crisis, Tamil newspapers had paid attention to the overall complicated situation faced by north-based Tamil politics at the moment.
Anura seeks Tamils’ support for Sinhala people’s cause
Below are excerpts from the speech delivered by NPP presidential candidate Anura Kumara Dissanayake addressing Tamil people in the north on 5 September:
“In a context where the people of the south have come forward to bring about change, if you become opponents of that change, imagine what will the people of the south think about that. Do you like Jaffna to be known as those who opposed or resisted that change? Do you like the north to be known like that? I reassure you that we will win. But, be a part of the victory. Do not become those who opposed it.”
This speech implies that the people of the north should support the change which the NPP believes that the people of the south needs. However, are the people of the south ready to bring about the ‘change’ that the people of the north needs in the country? Amidst fears about losing southern votes, South-based Sinhala candidates have carefully paid attention to north-based people’s requests and are proposing solutions to their issues in an extremely careful manner. At the same time, claiming that he did not visit the north to cut a deal with Tamil people, even Dissanayake is ignoring Tamil people’s real issue and is requesting north-based Tamil people’s contribution for southern people’s ‘change.’ Does Dissanayake not understand that unlike in the case of the southern people where fuel, cooking gas, foreign reserves, and a country free of thieves are demanded, the people of the north demand an environment where everyone is treated equally, human rights are protected, perpetrators of past crimes are not protected, and people are not oppressed for having been born into a particular ethnicity? Or, is he acting as if he does not understand it?
In a country where there was a civil war and allegations have been levelled with regard to crimes against Tamil people, that statement, made by a southern politician, showed absolutely no regard for the psyches of those affected by the war. However, it was Wickremesinghe who took the first step in trying to attract the people’s attention to this matter. Until that point, south-based newspapers had not published a single report about the contents of Dissanayake’s speech.
However, on 7 September, a front-page article that had summarised the said speech had been published in the Thinakaran newspaper, a government-published Tamil newspaper that often publishes pro-Ranil articles. The article’s headline was “If the southern people who are seeking change were opposed! – The speech delivered by Anura to the people of Jaffna in a threatening tone.” None of the other Tamil newspapers had published articles about that speech on that day.

On the following day, i.e. 8 September, the Thinakaran, Kalaikathir, and Kaleimurusu newspapers had published front-page articles reporting that during a speech delivered on 7 September in Jaffna, Wickremesinghe had said that Dissanayake should apologise to the people of the north and south.

On 8 September, The Sunday Observer had for the first time published a news story highlighting the abovementioned contents of Dissanayake’s speech delivered in the north. However, other south-based newspapers had not published anything regarding the speech.

Although it was on 5 September that Dissanayake delivered a speech in the north ignoring the aspirations of the Tamil people, until Wickremesinghe said on 7 September that Dissanayake should apologise, northern and southern newspapers had not paid any special attention to Dissanayake’s speech.
However, on 8 September, the Kalaikathir newspaper had published a rather unique article on its fourth page with the headline “What’s Ranil’s qualification?”. It read:
“It is true that Anura should apologise to the Tamil people for his statement. However, his United National Party (UNP) has played a significant role in the burning of the Jaffna Library, communal riots of 1983, and in the systematic killing of Tamils such as the war waged against the Tamil people. But, he has not apologised to the Tamil people for any of this. It does not seem that he is planning to apologise in the future too. Does such a person have a moral right to say that another candidate should apologise for his opinion? The people should think about this.”

After such articles were published by Tamil newspapers, on 9 September, Sinhala newspapers including Divaina, Lankadeepa, Mawbima, and Dinamina had published articles about Wickremesinghe’s statement that Dissanayake should apologise for the latter’s statement. On the same day, the Ceylon Today and Mawbima newspapers had quoted Dissanayake as responding that it is Wickremesinghe who should apologise to the people because he is inciting racism.

Dissanayake is one of the presidential candidates that is accountable to the entire citizenry. Although he has made a statement that implies that the people should be satisfied with Sinhala people’s aspirations and ignores Tamil people’s aspirations, the Sinhala mindset obsessed with patriotism is not capable of comprehending the subtle dominant mindset such a statement reveals. At the same time, in a context where south-based Sinhala politicians keep bringing up Tamil people’s aspirations just to ignore them later, the Tamil society does not lose any sleep over the statements made by south-based politicians from time to time. In a context where Wickremesinghe is attempting to use the aforementioned statement to stir up the people of the north against his rival candidate Dissanayake, does Tamil newspapers’ behaviour suggests that they do not care about ‘voice cut’ politics when it comes to national level political crises unlike in the south?