 |
 |
 |
 |
By D.B.S. Jeyaraj
The controversy surrounding the Alperton Eelappatheeswarar Hindu temple has entered a new
phase last week with activists of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam organization in London going to
courts over the issue. In a striking example of dramatic irony the very same LTTE that violated a
number of legal norms in misappropriating the Sivan temple is now trying to use the British judicial
system to strengthen its hold over it.
A group of tiger activists and supporters went to the London High Court on Maundy Thursday (Mar
24th) and obtained a seven day injunction to keep the Eelappatheswarar temple on Ealing road in
Wembley, Middlesex open to the Hindu public for worship. Earlier the landlord - Pavitt Hall Trust of
Brent North ad South Labour Party - had closed the temple temporarily while matters regarding
ownership and management of the temple were being sorted out.
The Alperton Eelappatheswarar Sivan temple controversy is a spin off from the Rajasingham
Jeyadevan issue that was highlighted in these columns for the past two weeks. The temple
established in 2000 has a four member board of trustees. The chairman Rajasingham Jeyadevan
and secretary AK Vivekananthan were inveigled into the Wanni through false pretences and held
captive by the tigers.
They were forced under duress to endorse a transfer of the temple to a tiger fronted London outfit
called the Sivayogam Trust controlled by a well - known LTTE activist Nagenthiram Seevaratnam.The
Sivayogam trust runs the Muthumariamman temple in Tooting, London.
While Jeyadevan was held in LTTE custody at Puthukkudiyiruppu Vivekananthan returned to London
and informed the other trustees Koneswaran and Soundararajan of the situation. With the LTTE
stipulating the complete transfer of the temple to Seevaratnam's control as the condition for
Jeyadevans release the trustees went along reluctantly with the exercise.
The LTTE however went back on its promise and refused to release Jeyadevan despite the temple
being transferred and Seevaratnam taking occupation of premises. This bad faith displayed by the
tigers resulted in the Jeyadevan family going to law enforcement authorities in Britain. Pressure was
exerted on the LTTE hierarchy in Britain to release Jeyadevan or face the consequences. This move
saw the LTTE changing its stance overnight and releasing Jeyadevan.
After returning home Jeyadevan whose health had suffered immensely during the 59 day
incarceration sought medical treatment while quietly contemplating the future. Meanwhile the temple
premises owned by the British Labour party's Pavitt Hall trust was occupied by the Seevaratnam
controlled Sivayogam trust. The Pavitt Hall trust was alerted to the dubious manner in which the
illegal transfer had been effected.
It was also discovered that the terms of the original lease forbade a sub - lease or transfer of lease
to any other. The requirement was that a new lease had to be signed if the original temple
management was transferred to any other. Seevaratnam in his eagerness to publicise his control has
repainted the sign as Sivayogam Trust hurriedly. He had also fired five temple employees including
the Brahmin priest. They too have filed action demanding reinstatement or compensation.
In view of the provision concerning the lease the Pavitt Hall trust informed Seevaratnam that his
occupying the premises was illegal. The landlord gave due notice that the temple building will be
sealed and closed to the public until such time as the problem regarding the lease was remedied or a
fresh lease signed. Under these circumstances the temple premises were sealed and locks changed
by the Pavitt Hall Trust at midnight on Mar 22nd.
Seevaratnam an accountant by profession and fully cognizant with the law led a bunch of tiger
activists into the temple premises on Mar 23rd morning and occupied the temple by force. The locks
were broken open. Pooja rituals were conducted and devotees both genuine and tigers in "bhakthi"
garb participated in worship.
At the same time the illegal occupants began packing up the temple vessels and valuable chanks to
be taken out. The temple jewels used to adorn the deities on ceremonial occasions had already
been removed from the temple vault. About 15, 000 pound sterling in the Temple bank account was
also transferred to the Sivayogam trust.
Hearing about the illegal re- occupation the Pavitt Hall trust informed the Police. The Police then
entered premises with representatives of the landlord and evicted the illegal "squatters". Police
began guarding the premises.LTTE activists however began picketing the area outside the temple
and commenced a signature campaign urging that the temple closure be removed.
They also transported several tiger supporters to the temple who began demanding that they be
allowed to enter the temple and worship. The LTTE also exploited the fact that the landlord was the
Labour Party and that a Parliamentary election is expected very soon. LTTE stalwarts went to
Conservative and Liberal - Democratic Party politicians and canvassed their support against Labour
party highhandedness. Without disclosing the method used in gaining temple control the London
tigers started accusing the Labour Party of denying minority communities their right of worship.
At nightfall Seevaratnam and others requested the Police to permit the lighting of lamps and
conducting the night pooja as failure to do so was a violation of Hindu rituals. The British Bobbies
relented and allowed the night pooja. Thereafte they closed the doors again.
On the following Mar 24th morning the Sivayogam trust fronting for the LTTE went to the London
High Court seeking an injunction against the Pavitt Hall Trust. The solicitors informed the landlord at
10 am that legal remedy was being sought. There was no time for Pavitt Hall to be represented in
Court. An exparte hearing was concluded without the landlord being present.
The LTTE which violated several human rights of Jeyadevan and Vivekanandan in acquiring the
temple now invoked the freeedom of worship right to protest the temple closure. A public petition
urging the temple be opened was submitted. A copy of the document transferring control to
Sivayogam trust that was signed by the Eelappatheeswarar trustees due to coercion was also
attached. It was also prayered that the long week - end will see a lot of devotees at the temple and
that they should not be forbidden entry.
The Courts issued a seven day injunction on the Pavitt Hall trust from closing the temple premises
and ordered Police to allow worship. This was to be expected because British judges with their
notions of fair play are sensitive about minority rights. Temporary control was given the Sivayogam
Trust. A full hearing has been ordered for Mar 31st. It is expected that the temple issue will be
thrashed out fully in courts from that day. Meanwhile Seevaratnam has requested the Pavitt Hall
Trust for a meeting to iron out differences before the hearing next week.
The tigers who regard themselves as smart operators are making shrewd moves to strengthen their
hold on the Eelappatheeswarar Temple. Seeking legal recourse is one such gambit. While this has
paid dividends in the short term it is a moot point as to whether it could be counterproductive in the
long run. By taking on the Pavitt Hall Trust openly in Court to get an injunction Seevaratnam and his
henchmen may have opened a can of worms.
The well - known axiom "Seek Justice with Clean Hands" is applicable in this instance. The temple
transfer was not done through fair means. So when the matter comes up before courts the landlord
will no doubt raise the manner and mode in which the transfer was done. The impropriety of the
lease transfer is very likely to be questioned. This will necessarily result in the four"legal" trustees of
Eelappatheeswarar Temple testifying on the side of the landlord. Jeyadevan and Vivekanandan
could come out with their harrowing experience in full while testifying under oath.
The attention of the British mainstream media could be drawn to this case. The stranglehold of the
LTTE over the Tamil Diaspora in Britain could be exposed. No Country likes its citizens or permanent
residents to be under the influence of another "state" unless they are legal dual citizens. In the
LTTE's case it is not an accepted state. Moreover it is proscribed as a terrorist organization under
British Anti - Terrorism Laws. For members of a banned terrorist outfit to abduct British residents and
citizens and coerce them into transferring property on British soil to avowed and active members of
such an organization raises deep concerns.
The fall out therefore from this case could be detrimental to the LTTE. The unwritten understanding
the LTTE had with British authorities at the time of Terrorism Act 2000 was that mo action would be
taken against the tigers if they adopt a low profile in Britain. The continuing participation of the LTTE
in the so called peace process has secured the tiger position further. The Eelappatheeswarar temple
affair being scrutinised in open court could affect that situation. At best tiger operatives may be
penalised under criminal law. At worst they could be punished under terrorist laws. Furthermore
there is that question of perjury.
Realising perhaps that legal recourse could be double - edged the London tigers have once again
begun their familiar intimidating tactics. Telephone calls have been made to two trustees and the wife
of a trustee. A personal visit too has been paid to the workplace of a trustee. The people involved
allegedly are Seevaratnam's son Nirmalan, Bala Master, Dharmalingam Sudhaharan of Time Travels
and Singham.
The message has been starkly clear. The Eelappatheeswarar temple transfer to Sivayogam Trust is
actually a deal on behalf of the LTTE. The tigers are the sole representatives of the Tamil people.
So dont defy them or incur their displeasure. The best course for you all is to let by gones be by
gones. Let the temple be in the hands of Seevaratnam who is backed by the LTTE leadership. Do
not come out with the truth in courts. Dont back up the Pavitt Hall trust. This is the essence of the
message conveyed. The telephone calls have been recorded and a Police Complaint has been
made.
Meanwhile sections of Eelappatheeswarar devotees are deeply disturbed over the
misappropriation of temple funds and jewels by the Seevaratnam coterie. These sections are
planning to lodge a formal complaint to the Police and Charity Commissioner about this breach of
trust and crminal misappropriation.
The Eelappatheeswarar temple issue has also helped focus the spotlight on another simiiar exercise.
The Tamil school and Centre for Senior Tamils run by Dr. Nithianandan was also transferred recently
to the Sivayogam trust. Dr, Nithy himself has been adopting a low profile after this transfer and does
not discuss the reasons for his letting Seevaratnam take over. The Jeyadevan abduction has thrown
new light on the issue.
The London Tamil grapevine is buzzing with the story that Dr. Nithianandan too was victimised like
Jeyadevan. Apparently this man with a Chemistry doctorate had gone to Jaffna or a holiday recently.
The tigers had been tipped off. A tiger squad led by Sudha had gone to the place where he was
staying and had allegedly abducted him for a while and threatened him. Sudha is the former LTTE
fundraiser in Germany who was hailed many years for extortion. After serving his sentence he
returned to Sri Lanka.It is now believed that Dr. Nithy agreed to transfer his institutions to
Seevaratnam as a result of this .
Another tiger activist who has returned to London is Ramachandran alias Ramsar alias Anton Rajah,
This former tiger spokesperson in London was an ex - cohort of Anton Balasingham. After falling
from grace he too had gone to the Wanni and was reported missing. This column referred to this last
week. Now Anton Rajah has returned but is keeping quiet about his adventures in Tamil Eelam.
The Jeyadevan abduction and Eelappatheeswarar temple issue are hotly debated topics among
expatriate Tamils now. The London based TV network "Deepam" is trying to organize a public debate
on air between Jeyadevan and Seevaratnam on the issue. It remains to be seen whether this move
will be successful or not. [Sunday Leader]
