I refer to Neville Ladduwahetty’s article on "The 13th Amendment and beyond" appearing in the Island of 1st May. His recommendation that a referendum be held before implementing a political package, appears to be procedurally proper and legally correct. But the outcome of such an initiative is bound to be a foregone conclusion, in a country where the race to be most disturbed by devolution, forms 75% of the population. A referendum in such circumstances would be a waste of time and energy and an encouragement to majoritarianism which Ladduwahetty impliedly wished to discourage through a Bill of Rights in an earlier article.

The more pragmatic move appears to be the alternative of sticking to the status quo as regards the 13th Amendment and consider its future development through ‘soft diplomacy’ after the ongoing moves to resettle and rehabilitate the North and the East are successfully concluded. Even Hon. Vinayagamoorthy Muralidaran had expressed his willingness to think of the 13th Amendment+ after the immediate priorities are accomplished. Whether the majority of Tamils agree with him or not, they do not appear to have an alternative at the moment. Perhaps saner counsel may prevail after the dust of the war has settled down and Tamils are satisfied that they have not been taken for a ride.