9 (Goal: 1,000)


Petitioner: Muthamizh started on October 29, 2010


Since the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi on May 14, 1991 the Government of India (GOI) has banned the LTTE as a terrorist organization. Thereafter, the ban has been extended every 2 years. On May 14, 2010 the GOI extended the ban on LTTE for another two years.

Among a number of reasons given for the ban by Notification S.O. 1090 (E) published by the Ministry of Home Affairs, GOI is that the LTTE’s objective for a separate homeland (Tamil Eelam) for all Tamils threatens the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India, and amounts to cession and secession of a part of the territory of India from the Union and thus falls within the ambit of an unlawful activity.

There has not been a single case of terrorist act in the name of LTTE in India barring the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Even then it was not a terrorist act.

As per the Supreme Court of India judgment, by Judge Thomas, the killing was carried out due to personal animosity of the LTTE chief Prabhakaran towards Rajiv Gandhi. The judgment further cited the death of Thileepan in a hunger strike and the suicide by 12 LTTE cadres in a ship in October 1987. The judgment while convicting the accused, four of them to death and others to various jail terms, states that absolutely no evidence existed that any one of the conspirators ever desired the death of any Indian other than Rajiv Gandhi, though several people were killed. Judge Wadhwa further states there is nothing on record to show that the intention to kill Rajiv Gandhi was to overawe the Government. Hence it was held that it was not a terrorist act under TADA (Act).

Appearing before the New Delhi's Tribunal hearing petitions against the ban of the LTTE and presided over by the Delhi High Court judge Vikramjit Sen MDMK leader Vaiko argued that he should be involved in the hearing and to plead that the ban extended by the GOI on 14 May 2010 should not be confirmed by the Tribunal. He said the very first reason given by GOI for the ban that the Tamil Eelam objective of the LTTE includes Tamil Nadu, falls to the ground to pieces as the LTTE never wanted to annex an inch of land of Tamil Nadu, Vaiko said, adding that GOI’s reasons are totally fabricated with false. Vaiko, who is facing two cases of sedition for his speeches supporting the banned outfit argued against extending the ban before the tribunal.

When Vaiko explained that Tamil Eelam is a justifiable demand of Eelam Tamils for an independent nation only in the north and east of the island, the judge asked “Mr. Vaiko, the LTTE, don’t they want to annex Tamil Nadu or part of India with Tamil Eelam?”

“My Lord, I am really happy for this opportunity to clarify this vital point. The LTTE never wanted to annex even an inch of land of Tamil Nadu with their Tamil Eelam,” Vaiko replied.

“Could the Union Government of India prove that the LTTE did mention in any of their periodicals or manifesto or publications? They could not. This is beyond any stretch of imagination of Eelam Tamils. This is a vicious, malicious campaign made deliberately by the Indian Government to malign the LTTE,” Vaiko told the Tribunal.

When Vaiko brought out the example that the liberation of Bangladesh was not annexation of West Bengal, the judge Sen [a Bengali], with a smile said, “Such a talk was also there,” to which Vaiko said that it didn’t happen.

As people supporting liberation is universal, as seen in the cases of Kosovo, East Timor and Palestine, and as the LTTE is no threat to territorial integrity of India, how could establishing Tamil Eelam come within the ambit of ‘unlawful activity’ in India, argued Vaiko.

In our view, the real reason for banning the LTTE is to stifle political opponents of the ruling DMK-Congress government in Tamil Nadu. The ban is a convenient tool to harass, arrest and jail those who criticize the state government.

Therefore, we the World Tamils, including those in India, appeal to the Hon. Prime Minister to lift the ban on the non-existing LTTE and not to use the ban as a cloak to clamp down on freedom of speech and expression.