The saga of India & Sri Lanka’s statements on Katchatheevu, and 2 RTI replies
New Delhi: In advance of the Lok Sabha election, a political row has damaged out in excess of the barren and uninhabited 1.6 km-prolonged Katchatheevu island, which India recognised as Sri Lankan territory in 1974. The controversy erupted pursuing a Ideal to Facts (RTI) ask for submitted by Tamil Nadu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) president K. Annamalai.
Primary Minister Narendra Modi and Exterior Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar blamed the Congress and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) for callously offering away the island.


Exhibit Complete Article


The then primary minister Indira Gandhi signed a maritime boundary arrangement with her Sri Lankan counterpart Sirimavo Bandaranaike, which recognised the island, found in the Palk Strait about 24 km north-east of Ramanathapuram in Tamil Nadu and roughly 22 km south-west of Delft Islands in Sri Lanka, as a section of Sri Lankan territory.
Modi posted on ‘X’ (formerly Twitter) that, at the time, the Congress “callously gave away” the island.
Eye opening and startling! New points expose how Congress callously gave absent #Katchatheevu. This has angered each and every Indian and reaffirmed in people’s minds- we cannot ever have confidence in Congress!
Weakening India’s unity, integrity and pursuits has been Congress’ way of doing work for…— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) March 31, 2024
On Monday, Jaishankar claimed that the Congress and the DMK are liable for the condition wherever 6,184 Indian fishermen and 1,175 fishing vessels have been detained by the Sri Lankan authorities in the earlier two a long time.
Nevertheless, an additional 2015 RTI reply furnished by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and shared by Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Priyanka Chaturvedi on ‘X’ mentioned that there was no “acquiring or ceding of territory belonging to India” as part of the 1974 settlement due to the fact the location in problem experienced by no means been demarcated.
It’s possible @MEAIndia will be capable to address this discrepancies in its RTI response in 2015 vis a vis 2024.As per the RTI response in 2015 when present-day Foreign Minister was serving as the FS it was reported “This did not require possibly getting or ceding of territory belonging to India… pic.twitter.com/OIWlej3YVs— Priyanka Chaturvedi🇮🇳 (@priyankac19) April 1, 2024
ThePrint arrived at the MEA on the queries raised by the 2015 RTI reply via text concept, but did not acquire a reaction until the publication of this report. The report will be current when a response is received. Meanwhile, an assessment of the formal data exhibits that none of the boundary agreements involving India and Sri Lanka use the term “cede” with regard to territory. It simply states the latitude and longitudes that would type the maritime boundary concerning India and Sri Lanka. ThePrint points out the historical past behind Katchatheevu island.
Also Go through: ‘Callously gave absent isle’ — Modi invokes Katchatheevu, Congress calls it ‘distortion of history’
Historical past of Katchatheevu
On Sunday, Annamalai publicly talked over documents received by way of the RTI reply, which incorporates two paperwork — a backgrounder ready by the MEA in 1968 and a history of dialogue of a assembly amongst the then foreign secretary and the main minister of Tamil Nadu, M. Karunanidhi. ThePrint has accessed the RTI reply.
Graphic: Soham Sen | ThePrint
The island is property to the St. Anthony’s Church — administered by the diocese of Jaffna in Sri Lanka. The problem of ownership 1st arose in 1921 at a meeting on fishing rights held among the representatives of the authorities of Madras and the then Ceylon administration. The British Raj at the time accepted the Ceylonese declare to the island “subject to the zamindari legal rights of the Raja of Ramnad — who claimed to very own the rights to the island,” the backgrounder by the MEA revealed in 1968 pointed out. The MEA observed that the proceedings of the convention appeared to have been forwarded to the admiralty in the United kingdom, which raised objections at the time and, therefore, was not ratified by the then Govt of India. The Ceylon administration, nevertheless, managed de facto handle of the island.
The challenge arose between the two neighbours when before long following Independence, the Indian Navy “intimated” to Colombo its intention of keeping exercise routines on the island.
Graphic: Soham Sen | ThePrint
Ceylon at the time had said that “prior” permission was expected, and the Indian exercises were not held. In 1955, the administration in Ceylon intimated its intention of functioning gunnery exercise routines on the island to New Delhi — once more bringing the concern to the detect of the Government of India. At the time, the MEA pointed out that the then Attorney Typical of India M.C. Setalvad indicated in an opinion that sovereignty above the island is in favour of it getting a portion of India.
The MEA’s authorized office in 1960 mentioned that there exists a legal scenario for India, but at the least, the federal government must focus on obtaining fishing rights “around the island”. At the time, the dispute bordering the sovereignty of the island was not solved thanks to the inside scenario in Sri Lanka, famous the then Commonwealth secretary Y.D. Gundevia in the MEA backgrounder.Maritime boundary agreements with Sri Lanka
In 1974, India recognised Katchatheevu as a portion of the territory of Sri Lanka beneath a maritime boundary agreement signed by Indira Gandhi and Bandaranaike. The settlement looked at the waters from Adam’s Bridge to Palk Strait. Report 5 of the settlement, however, ensured that Indians could go to Katchatheevu with out any prerequisite of a travel document, these types of as a visa.
Write-up 4 of the agreement highlighted that the two nations shall “have sovereignty” and “exclusive jurisdiction” more than the waters, islands, the continental shelf and sub-soil dependent on the demarcated line, which set the island of Kathchatheevu in Sri Lankan territory.A adhere to-up settlement in 1976 on the boundaries of the Gulf of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal has a identical clause, but tends to make no point out of the suitable of Indians to stop by Katchatheevu with no the requirement of a vacation doc. Article 5 of the 1976 arrangement mentioned, “Each celebration shall have sovereign rights and distinctive jurisdiction about the continental shelf and the distinctive economic zone as properly as their resources, regardless of whether living or non-dwelling, falling on its facet of the aforesaid boundary.” Tamil Nadu needed island back again
In 1991, the Tamil Nadu assembly adopted a resolution demanding the retrieval of Katchatheevu.
In 2008, the then Tamil Nadu chief minister J. Jayalalithaa approached the Supreme Court docket, boasting that the two boundary agreements between India and Sri Lanka had been unconstitutional, and to nullify the agreements. In his 2008 speech, the then Sri Lankan international minister Rohitha Bogollagama produced it clear that any nullification of the agreements by the Supreme Courtroom of India would not be binding on his nation. At the listening to of petitions requesting the Supreme Court’s intervention to aid the launch of arrested Indian fishermen, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi experienced advised the leading court in 2014 that it was difficult to retrieve the island from Sri Lanka. “To retrieve it now, we have to go to war,” he experienced said. (Edited by Richa Mishra)
Also Read through: ‘Sri Lankan govt will take our boats, arrests our men’ — why TN fishermen boycotted Katchatheevu fest
Supply link
