Untitled - International Commission of Jurists

To place the discussion regarding the findings of this Commission of Inquiry in their
proper perspective, it is necessary to refer to the historical events that led to the
communal violence of 1977 (see Chapter One). The stance of the TULF in openly
professing a policy of non-violence while approving or even encouraging sections of
the militant youth to engage in acts of violence was strongly condemned by
Commissioner Sansoni. He relied on evidence of police officers given before the
Commission to establish the conventional wisdom of the establishment at that time;
namely, that certain actions of the Federal Party were the principal cause for the
outbreak of ethnic rioting and civil disorder in 1977.
In particular, the Sansoni Report advanced the view that the disruption by the police
of the fourth conference of the International Association of Tamil Research (IATR) in
Jaffna (which was a key turning point in the spread of militancy in the North) was
justified in as much as the maintenance of law and order demanded expansive police
action. 213 In regard to the deaths of nine persons who were electrocuted when electric
wires were dislodged during the disruption of the meeting, Commissioner Sansoni
placed implicit faith in the magisterial verdict that this dislodging did not result from
intentional firing by the police but instead was accidental. 214
Substantial doubts have been raised as to Commissioner Sansoni’s rendition of this
event, as concisely detailed by Hoole when he refers to the (unofficial) 215 de Kretzer
Commission Report that also examined the disruption of the IATR conference, but
came to different conclusions. 216 The de Kretzer Commission, for example,
unequivocally maintained that the overhead electric wire was brought down by the
police shooting, 217 and did not justify police actions as did the Sansoni Commission.
Commissioner Sansoni did lend a sympathetic ear to the root problems associated
with communal unrest, as for example, in his acknowledgement that the Tamil
language should have been recognised as a national or ‘even as an official’ language
before 1978. 218 His exhaustive relating of the nature of the riots that occurred at
various parts of the country in Chapter 111 of his report is highly effective, given its
minute detailing of the loss to life and property of persons of Tamil origin during the
1977 communal violence. 219 His report also detailed loss and damage caused to
213 ibid, at p. 64.
214 ibid.
215 This was a citizens commission appointed by a section of the Jaffna citizenry. Its value and
credibility was enhanced by the quality of its members; it comprised retired Supreme Court judges O.L.
de Kretzer and V. Manickavasagar (both fellow judges with Sansoni on the Supreme Court Bench)
along with Bishop Kuvendran.
216 Hoole, Rajan, op. cit, at p. 24.
217 ibid, at p. 25. Hoole pointed to a further element: “Although contained in the de Kretzer report,
Sansoni who was eager to justify the police, paid no attention to the police going berserk after the
incident, assaulting civilians on the streets and the Central Bus Stand.”
218 The Sansoni Commission report, Sessional Paper No. VII, July 1980, at p. 73. Sansoni took the
somewhat optimistic view however, that this lacunae has now been remedied by the 1978 Constitution
recognising Tamil as a national language (Article 19) while further providing for its use as a medium of
instruction, as a language of legislation, administration and of the Courts. (Articles 21 to 25 ) and
exhorted the government to take steps to implement these provisions without delay lest it be thought
that the recognition given to Tamil is ‘an empty thing.’
219 The violence apparently started after a false message was radioed from a police station in Jaffna on
07.08.1977 purporting to be from the Superintendent of Police to the Inspector General of Police
68