By Veeragathy Thanabalasingham
Colombo, July 28 – This week marks the 42nd anniversary of Black July 1983, a tragic chapter of ethnic violence unleashed against Tamils across Sri Lanka with the tacit support of then-President JR Jayewardene’s government. Sixteen years after the civil war that followed, these events remain a haunting scar on the nation’s conscience. For many, particularly younger generations, Black July is a distant memory, known only through narratives rather than lived experience. Yet, the shadow of that pogrom and the subsequent war looms large, underscoring the unresolved ethnic question that continues to divide Sri Lanka.
While calls for accountability for human rights violations and war crimes during the civil war’s final stages persist, the truth about Black July remains buried, with no one held accountable. The absence of justice raises a sobering question: what guarantees exist to prevent another such tragedy? For Sri Lanka’s youth, understanding the political roots of the ethnic crisis that fueled Black July and the civil war is essential to building a peaceful future.
Black July brought international shame to Sri Lanka, but the greater disgrace is that, 42 years later, no acceptable political solution addresses the legitimate aspirations of minority communities, particularly Tamils. Opportunities for resolution after Black July and the civil war were squandered by southern Sri Lankan leaders, who prioritized majoritarian agendas over minority rights.
The National People’s Power (NPP) government, led by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, claims to champion equality across communities. However, this rhetoric rings hollow without concrete steps to address the systemic discrimination and suffering endured by Tamils, especially during the three-decade civil war. Instead, the government’s actions appear to appease nationalist forces that have long obstructed solutions to the ethnic issue.
Two pivotal developments since Black July merit attention. First, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, introduced under the 1987 Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord, aimed to devolve power through the Provincial Council system. Despite its limitations, it remains the only constitutional provision for devolution. However, successive Sri Lankan governments, as admitted by former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, deliberately undermined its implementation. India has consistently urged full implementation, but shifting geopolitical dynamics limit New Delhi’s leverage today. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s reluctance to emphasize the 13th Amendment during meetings with President Dissanayake reflects this cautious approach.
The NPP government has stated that the Provincial Council system will remain until a new constitution is drafted. Yet, opposition to the 13th Amendment in southern Sri Lanka casts doubt on whether a new constitution will uphold or expand devolution. If it offers less, how will India respond? More critically, do Tamil political parties have the strength to push for meaningful devolution if the amendment is weakened or abolished?
Tamil parties face a strategic dilemma. Most acknowledge that the 13th Amendment is not a comprehensive solution but could serve as an interim measure. However, their engagement with the Provincial Council system is inconsistent. While they urge India to pressure Sri Lanka on the amendment, they rarely raise the issue domestically or demand overdue council elections. When elections are announced, they participate without hesitation, yet remain silent on the centralized control of provinces by presidentially appointed governors.
Recent statements from Tamil leaders during Prime Minister Modi’s April 2025 visit to Sri Lanka reveal their varied approaches. M.A. Sumanthiran of the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi (ITAK) emphasized the need for meaningful devolution, ideally through a federal system, but supported using the Provincial Council system as a stopgap. He stressed India’s responsibility to uphold the Peace Accord. Conversely, Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam of the Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) argued that the 13th Amendment, constrained by Sri Lanka’s unitary framework, cannot resolve the ethnic issue. He called for India to facilitate dialogue with Tamil parties to explore federal solutions beyond the unitary system.
As the NPP government begins drafting a new constitution and plans Provincial Council elections for next year, Tamil parties must adopt a pragmatic approach. Engaging meaningfully with the Provincial Council system, despite its flaws, could address immediate needs in the North and East. By balancing realism with their long-term aspirations, Tamil leaders can better advocate for their communities and work toward a lasting solution to Sri Lanka’s ethnic question.
Veeragathy Thanabalasingham is a senior Colombo-based journalist.
