INVESTIGATION

The case of Eric Soundranayagam

Was a Jaffna youth involved in the killing of Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam captured in Chennai by the police and taken to Sri Lanka?

D.B.S. JEYARAJ

THERE is much anxiety-ridden speculation among Sri Lankan Tamils in Sri Lanka and abroad over allegations that a Sri Lankan Tamil youth was arrested in Chennai and then deported through "extra-legal" means to Colombo in mid-October. Controversy rages around the fate of 27-year-old Eric Soun-dranayagam, a native of Chunnakam in Jaffna, who is, according to police sources, being interrogated intensively by investigators in Colombo about his alleged role in masterminding the assassination of former Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) parliamentarian Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam. The circumstances under which Soundra- nayagam, described as a Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) operative, came to be placed under Sri Lankan official custody are shrouded in mystery. Allegations have been made in the Sri Lankan media in this matter that improper procedure was adopted by Indian and Sri Lankan officials. On the other hand, there have also been reports in the newspapers that he was arrested after he arrived in Sri Lanka from India. The controversy took a new turn with media reports claiming that Soundranayagam was also suspected of having been in India to plot the assassination of Congress(I) president and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Sonia Gandhi.

The assassination of Dr. Tiruchel-vam on July 29 this year initially left Sri Lankan investigators groping in the dark. While the suicide bomb method and advance intelligence reports clearly pointed to the LTTE's role in the crime, sleuths found themselves unable to detect persons actually involved in the planning and execution of the investigation. This pronounced delay impelled President Chandrika Kumaratunga to call for a status report on the investigation and order speedy action. Thereafter reports appeared in the Sri Lankan media quoting police sources that some LTTE suspects had been arrested and an LTTE safehouse in Colombo detected.

Subsequent news reports said that the man who had monitored Dr. Tiruchel-vam's movements and drawn up the blueprint for the assassination was Soundra- nayagam. It was said that after planning the murder, Soundranayagam had gone to Chennai. According to these reports, he is an old student of Union College in Tellippalai, Jaffna. Another LTTE operative, Kathiravan, was also an old student of Union College. Chief of the LTTE's intelligence wing, Pottu Amman (charge-sheeted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case), communicated through Kathiravan with Soundranayagam. The latter was working at a private telecommunications centre in the predominantly Tamil neighbourhood of Wellawatte, and at the same time studying in the Colombo Technical College.

All these facts had been gleaned from Kathiravan and Kamalan, an associate of Soundranayagam at the communications centre, both of whom were in police custody. Reports also said that Soundranayagam had left for India in the first week of July. He had, however, telephoned Kamalan from India after Dr. Tiruchelvam's death and allegedly boasted that he had masterminded the killing. Once the Colombo media started publishing details about Soundranayagam's alleged role in the killing and also stated that he was in India, the expectation was that his capture would be virtually impossible. In fact, there was even suspicion that the police, who were under pressure from President Kumaratunga to produce results on the investigation, "planted" this story as a red herring.

The next twist came when Kumar Ponnambalam, a Tamil lawyer who is also the general secretary of the All Ceylon Tamil Congress, sent a letter by fax to President Kumaratunga and also released it to the press. Ponnambalam has in recent times acquired an image of being an ardent sympathiser and unaccredited spokesperson of the LTTE. Ponnambalam drew attention to an alleged incident concerning Soundranayagam - that he had been informed of certain incidents by Soundranayagam's maternal uncle in Denmark. Thereafter Ponnambalam had made his own investigations, in the course of which he contacted "friends" in India. His faxed letter to Kumaratunga was based on information that was thus gathered.

Ponnambalam said that Soundra-nayagam had gone to India in the first week of July to attend his sister's wedding, after obtaining a visa from the Indian High Commission. He stayed in Chennai for a while after the wedding. On October 8, Soundranayagam went to Tiruvanmiyur, in Chennai, to meet Fr. Samuel Gerrard, who had solemnised his sister's wedding. Ponnambalam alleged that Soundranayagam was taken into custody at Tiruvanmiyur by Indian police officials. Subsequent inquiries by relatives revealed that he had been handed over to officials of the Sri Lankan National Intelligence Bureau, on October 16, according to him.

Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam.

Ponnambalam also alleged that passengers on the Sri Lankan Airlines Flight No. 132 from Tiruchi in Tamil Nadu to Colombo on October 16 had seen a young, lean Tamil in his twenties seated with three armed Indian police officials at the airport departure lounge. Later the same person was seen seated with Sri Lankan security officials in the rear of the plane. The curiosity of the passengers was further aroused when it was noticed that the Tamil youth had not passed through immigration. An ambulance was also seen on the runway when the plane landed in Colombo, Ponnambalam said.

On the basis of this information, Ponnambalam wanted President Kumaratunga to make clear whether it was Soundranayagam who was seen on the Sri Lankan Airlines flight. Ponnambalam also wanted Kumaratunga to state whether Soundranayagam or somebody else was being extradited to Sri Lanka and if so, whether proper legal procedure was being followed.

The media publicity surrounding this alleged episode has troubled sections of the Sri Lankan Tamil community to some extent. It was quite galling to those of LTTE persuasion. If the incident was true, it was in their perception a great "let-down" by India. These feelings were exacerbated by their reactions to the Lok Sabha elections in India. The return to power of the Bharatiya Janata Party was hailed, as the party is considered to be somewhat sympathetic to the predominantly "Hindu" Sri Lankan Tamils. Further-more, the BJP's allies such as the Shiv Sena, the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, the Pattali Makkal Katchi and the Samata Party, which is now a part of the Janata Dal (United), were looked upon as "LTTE-friendly". Thus there was jubilation in pro-LTTE Sri Lankan Tamil circles that the new Indian dispensation would be favourable to the LTTE.

Naturally, hardline Sinhala sentiment feared a pro-LTTE tilt in India's stand. Although the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) had been distancing itself in recent times from the militant Sri Lankan Tamil groups' cause, the party too was looked at with suspicion by Sinhala hardliners. All this led to the Sri Lankan Government seeking and obtaining an assurance from India that there was no change in its Sri Lanka policy.

Therefore, the controversy regarding the alleged role of Indian officials in the Soundranayagam affair was very unwelcome from the pro-LTTE Sri Lankan Tamil point of view. Did India really arrest and deport an LTTE suspect without following the usual procedures? If true, it was a bitter pill for the LTTE'S sympathisers to swallow. All the media hype about an LTTE-friendly government in New Delhi was negated. To what extent were the Union Government and the Government of Tamil Nadu involved in the exercise? The Sri Lankan Tamil media, particularly the overseas journals that are either controlled or influenced by the LTTE, were indignant.

There were three broad types of reaction. The first was to absolve the Central and Tamil Nadu governments of the "blame". It was alleged that Indian espionage agencies were the villains of the piece. A variant was to blame the Q Branch of the Tamil Nadu police. It was also insinuated that Indian policemen had been bribed by Colombo and that the whole affair was done clandestinely, without official sanction. Some names were mentioned.

The second type of reaction was to state that the whole incident had been managed by the law-enforcement agencies of both countries on an official-to-official level. Neither the Central nor the Tamil Nadu government was aware of this. Had the government been aware, it would not have allowed the development to occur considering the political repercussions that could follow. Now that the matter had become public, there would be remedial action. The officials responsible would be penalised. It was expected that the LTTE's "friends" in the government would raise hell over the issue.

SRIYANTHA WALPOLA
The scene of Neelan Tiruchelvam's assassination on July 29, 1999.

The third type of reaction was that the whole incident was managed at a government-to-government level. It was alleged that procedures had been initiated through the diplomatic missions. Cabinet Ministers and the State Government were in the know. Although officially sanctioned, it was kept low-key to avoid embarrassment to Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi. It was recalled that in the 1970s the DMK chief was accused of deporting the well-known militant Selvarajah Yogachandran alias "Kuttimani" to Sri Lanka while he was Chief Minister. It was then argued on Karunanidhi's behalf that he was ignorant of Kuttimani's actual role. So in order to avoid similar charges, the Soundranayagam incident was being kept under wraps, it was stated.

Whatever the reasons attributed by the pro-LTTE media for the manner in which the alleged exercise was conducted, it seemed that there was unanimity of opinion that it was a triumph for Sri Lankan and Indian investigators. Information had purportedly been gathered and exchanged to carry out the arrest. It was alleged that the Indian police, acting on tip-offs from Colombo officials, had traced Soundranayagam and then detained and interrogated him.

After being satisfied about Soundranayagam's alleged involvement in LTTE activity, they handed him over to their Sri Lankan counterparts in Tiruchi, who took him back to Sri Lanka. Officials of both countries were unable to claim credit for the joint exercise because of possible political repercussions and potential embarrassment to the political leaders, it was alleged.

A noteworthy feature of the controversy was the conspicuous silence maintained by pro-LTTE political leaders in Tamil Nadu. A journal published in Canada stated that MDMK leader Vaiko had been requested by an organisation in Britain to condemn the alleged action taken in the case of Soundranayagam. Vaiko, however, declined, and according to the journal, explained that any statement by him would cause discomfiture to the Chief Minister.

Even as pro-LTTE media abroad began focussing on the Soundranayagam affair, the Sri Lankan press began presenting a different picture. Reports citing police sources said that Soundranayagam had neither been arrested in nor deported from India, and that he had returned of his own volition. Vigilant police officials had traced his whereabouts within a few hours and arrested him at Kerawalapitiya, a suburb of Colombo, they said. This claim, however, was a little unconvincing. Given the official reactions and public mood generated by the assassination, Soundranayagam would have to be foolish to have returned to Sri Lanka.

Once it was tacitly admitted that Soundranayagam was in police custody, a number of details about his alleged involvement with the LTTE began to surface in the media. It was said that Soundranayagam was assigned the task of planning attacks against seven targets, of which he had accomplished only one - Neelan Tiruchelvam. The others included Douglas Devananda, leader of the Eelam People's Democratic Party, and Posts Minister Mangala Samaraweera.

The next stage was the appearance of news reports in the Sri Lankan and Indian media that Soundranayagam might have had an ulterior motive in visiting India. It was said that he had been taking a Hindi language course at the Indian High Commission in Colombo. He had also allegedly tried to gain employment as a reporter on an English-language daily in India. He was supposed to have approached newspapers in Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Thiruvananthapuram. He had also travelled to Tiruchi where both Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Congress(I) president Sonia Gandhi had attended election rallies. His visits to Karnataka, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh were also viewed with suspicion because Sonia Gandhi had attended election meetings in these States. Given the modus operandi involved in Rajiv Gandhi's assassination in 1991 at Sriperumbudur during an election rally and the fact that Sivarajan, the leader of the assassination squad, successfully posed as a pressperson during a "dry run" at former Prime Minister V.P. Singh's election rally, Soundranayagam's Indian itinerary as well as his supposed attempts to become a reporter were regarded with suspicion. There have been speculative reports that a team of investigators from India may go to Colombo to interrogate him further.

Whatever be the truth about Soundranayagam's objectives, there is no denying that a strong case has been built up against him through media reports. But there have been many instances where such "trials by media" have occurred without any substantial follow-up action. Until and unless Soundranayagam is produced in an open court, the precise truth about his activities is unlikely to become public knowledge.

P. Nedumaran, the Tamil Nadu State convener of the Tamil National Movement and a loyal supporter of the LTTE, has issued a statement condemning the manner in which the whole incident occurred. He faulted the Central and Tamil Nadu governments for conniving with Sri Lanka on this issue. Nedumaran called upon both governments to clarify their position. It remains to be seen whether this will be done in the near future.