PARLIAMENT DEBATE WHEN KATCHA TEEVU WAS LOST

KATCHA TEEVU: ISLAND LOST

We are tracing the Katcha Theevu conflict from its past to present" Dravida Peravai

In Indian Parliament on July 23, 1974 Government of India made a statement on THE RE-AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIA AND SRILANKA ON BOUNDARY IN THE HISTORIC WATERS BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES AND RELATED MATTERS

Then Minister of External Affairs Mr.Swaran Singh will make a statement, The Hon'ble Speaker of the Lok Sabha announced.

Mr.Madhu Limayi M.P (Banka constituency) rose and said “On point of order, I had already given notice."

 Mr.K.Manoharan M.P (DMK Parliamentary Party Leader): "Each member must be given proper opportunity to express his views".

Mr.Era.Sezhiyan M.P (DMK): Before the Hon'ble 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 Srilanka the legal and constitutional properties involved have to be taken into account. This agreement goes against the interests of the country since it amounts to pure surrender of our territory without going through any 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'ble Minister, and we want to disassociate ourselves by walking out of the House.

K.Manoharan.M.P (DMK): 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 Srilanka Government and the Government of India is anti national and unpatriotic, it is the worst agreement ever signed by any civilized country of the world. I do not like to insult or hurt the feelings of either the people of Srilanka or the Prime Minister of Srilanka.

Hon'ble Speaker: Hon. Members are going to have a debate on foreign affairs when they can raise all these points.

K.Manoharan M.P (DMK): I must be permitted to speak now. Through this unholy agreement, the Srilanka 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.

Mr. Speaker: “He has a right to make a statement in the House"

Then in Hindi spoke Mr.ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE, Member of Parliament from Gwalior. In his speech he claimed that the original name of Katcha Theevu was Valideep, an island where Sri Rama and Vali fought.

After exchanges in Hindi, the turn of another Tamil Nadu Member came.

P.K.THEVAR M.P. (Forward Block) (Ramanathapuram): Katcha Theevu 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.... It is going to be the basis for future war. It is going to be the base and challenge for the life of the nation. I have to warn all these things because in the past it has been the tradition of our government to give bhoodan of the northern borders. (Interruptions).

Mr. Speaker: Kindly sit down.

Mr.P.K.N.Thevar: The division of India has cost the life of Mahatma Gandhi. It is not a part of Tamil Nadu but it is apart of the holy land of India. You are betraying...On behalf of my constituency and on behalf of the Forward Block, I walk out.

Mr.Muhamed Sheriff (Periakulam): Even on the 1 st April 1968, I produced sufficient records in this House to show that Katcha Theevu belongs to the Raja of Ramnad. Government has failed to go through these records. I 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 this place and the Chief Minister of the State. We condemn this action of Government and along with my friends; I also walk out in protest.

(P.K.N.THEVAR & MUHAMMAD SHERIFF THEN LEFT THE HOUSE)

Then Madhu Limayi spoke in Hindi. After his lengthy speech……………..

 Mr.P.K.Deo M.P (Kalahandi): One point of order, Sir. The statement that the Foreign Minister is going to make deals with cession of India territory. In this regard, two important issues are involved. This is the constitutional issue. Article 1 of the Constitution says: “The territory of India shall comprise the territories of the states, The Union Territories specified in the First Schedule, and such other territories as may be required. So further acquisition of territory can be accepted, but nowhere does the constitution provide for cession of even an inch of Indian Territory. The Katcha Theevu controversy was raised only a few years ago by the Ceylonese Government when Bandaranaike came to power. All the Revenue records of the Madras Government corroborate that Katcha Theevu 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 Zamindary of the Congress party. A few days back the Coco Island which is part 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 Katcha Theevu. 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 I would say that the statement which is going to be laid on the table of the Loksabha is not worth the paper on which it had 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.

Then ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE intervened and spoke one sentence in Hindi.

Mr.Speaker: “My ruling is that the Minister has a right to make a statement. When the Governments enter into an agreement that must come before the House. The Members must be informed of what is taking place.

Mr.Sezhiyan: But the agreement is unconstitutional

Mr. Speaker: How can we know it?

Mr.Atal Bihari Vajpayee:" It is published in the news papers."

Mr. Speaker: “How can the House be seized of the matter unless the Minister makes the statement?

Mr.Atal Bihari Vajpayee: “Can they violate the Constitution?”

Mr.Speaker: I have given the ruling. Now, the Minister...

Then Mr.Atal Bihari Vajpayee and another Member intervened.

 Meanwhile Mr.Kachwai tore up some papers and threw them away. Some members left the House at this stage.

Mr.L.Lakkappan: Sir the tearing of papers by a Hon'ble Member is contempt of the House. I want your ruling on this.

Mr.Speaker: 'My ruling is that tearing of papers is not keeping with decorum or dignity of the House.

THE MINISTER FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MR.SWARAN SINGH:

Over the years, since our independence, there has been a number of questions and discussions in the House regarding the Island of Katcha Theevu. Government have of course fully shared this interest and concern of arriving at an early and amicable solution of this long standing matter, and I am happy to say that an agreement was signed between the two Prime Ministers on June 28 th, a copy of which I am laying on the table of the House.

The Island of Katcha Theevu about 3/4 of a square mile is situated in the Palk Bay. It is about ten and half miles for the nearest landfall in Srilanka and about twelve and half miles from the nearest Indian shore. The Palk Bay which constitutes the historic waters of India and Srilanka is some 10 miles wide at its entrance through the Palk Straits and has an average width of 28 miles. The issue of deciding Indian and Srilankan claims to Katcha Theevu was closely connected with determining the boundary line between India and Srilanka in the waters of Palk Bay. The entire question 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 Srilanka. Katcha Theevu has always been an uninhabited island. Neither Srilanka nor India had any permanent presence there. During the long colonial rule period the question whether Katcha Theevu was part of India or part of Ceylon was frequently discussed with Governments 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 Katcha Theevu pending a final solution to be reached through amicable bilateral efforts.

I would particularly like to draw the attention of Honorable Members to the fact that when two sides have a good arguable case on a particular issue and the problem cannot be resolved expeditiously through bilateral negotiations, there is inevitably an attempt to seek outside interventions by appeal either to International Court of Justice of to third party arbitration. For our part, we have always been firmly of the view that in any differences with our neighboring countries, we should seek to resolve them through bilateral discussions without outside interference on the basis of equality and goodwill. It is a matter of satisfaction to us that our Prime Ministers resolve to settle this issue through direct bilateral talks was met with an equally warm response from the Prime Minister of Srilanka 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 Katcha Theevu 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 especially during the past year between senior officers of the two governments. This question of Katcha Theevu, for reasons I have just explained had necessarily to be dealt with as part of 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 in keeping in mind the legal principles and also keeping in mind our policy and 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 on rights of fishing, pilgrimage and navigation which both sides have enjoyed in the past, have fully been safeguarded for the future. It would be wrong to see this agreement as a victory for one side or the other. Both the countries have gained as a result of the agreement which is a result of mature statesmanship a victory for the cause of friendship and cooperation in the area. A potential major irritant in relations between the two countries which have 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 Srilanka.

Mr.M.Kalyanasundaram (CPI): Sir while my party welcomes the agreements reached between Srilanka 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 Katcha Theevu, fish and come back. The Honorable Minister says that these rights are fully protected. But there are problems which we would like our Government to take up with Srilanka and seek their solution for the reason, I submit, there should be a discussion on this statement. I have given notice of a motion. Would request you to allow a discussion on that.

Mr. Speaker: The general debate on foreign affairs is coming up next week.

Mr. Dipen Bhattacharya (Serampore): I want to seek one clarification. In the statement he has mentioned that Katcha Theevu has always been an uninhabited island, but a Hon'ble Member 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?

Mr.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.

Mr.Swaran Singh: The Honorable Member would no doubt be aware that in the year 1921 when both India and Srilanka were under British rule, fishery line had been decided by the British Government because they had control over both India and Srilanka as well as India. I am sure that the Honorable Members know that the 1921 fishery line was a line which was about three and half miles west of Katcha Theevu. 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 Srilankan fishermen. But in spite of that division the fishermen generally were free to fish even round about Katcha Theevu and they also used the Katcha Theevu 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 their nets etc.

About the traditional rights, if the Honorable 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 Srilanka's claims over sovereignty over Katcha Theevu has been recognized, the traditional rights of Indian fishermen and pilgrims to visit that island will remain unaffected. Similarly the traditional navigation rights exercised by India and Srilanka in each others waters will remain unaffected (interruptions)

Mr. Speaker: Later on we may have a debate on this but not now. I am not allowing anymore.

(Source: Lok Sabha Debates July 23 1974 Cols 186-201)

This will indicate which party stood where and how far they raised their voices.DMK members fought valiantly in Parliament. DMK Government earned the wrath of the Union Government. In those darkest days of emergency DMK government was dismissed. But almost all Tamil Nadu Governments and parties have raised their voice against bartering of Katcha Theevu.