Inclusion and Consultation of the Tamil Community in Northern and Eastern Sri Lanka in India-Sri Lanka Development Projects (2024-2025)

Introduction

The period of 2024-2025 has marked an intensified phase in India-Sri Lanka relations, manifesting in an unprecedented number of bilateral development agreements and infrastructure initiatives. Central to the debate about the impact and legitimacy of these development efforts is the extent to which the Tamil community in Sri Lanka’s Northern and Eastern Provinces has been genuinely consulted or included in the planning, negotiation, and implementation of such projects. This question is especially germane given the contested legacy of conflict, ongoing land disputes, and persistent calls for Tamil self-determination, alongside India's rhetorical and practical involvement in post-war Sri Lankan reconciliation and development. This report critically explores the degree and quality of Tamil consultation in key Indian-backed projects-most notably those involving the Jaffna International Airport, energy, and housing-and examines allegations of forced development and transparency deficits, while also situating these practices against relevant international norms and legal frameworks concerning indigenous and local community rights. The perspectives of Tamil civil society actors, political representatives, and oversight entities are woven throughout, providing a nuanced account of political reactions, legal implications, and ground realities.

Timeline of Behind-the-Scenes Negotiations

Mannar Wind Power Project (2020–2025)

2020–2021
Ceylon Electricity Board completes the 100 MW Thambapavani (Mannar Phase I) wind farm—funded in part by the Asian Development Bank.
2022
Government approves Adani Green Energy’s second phase: initially 52 turbines (250 MW), later scaled down to 10 turbines (50 MW) after environmental review concerns.
May 2024
Sri Lanka signs a 20-year power purchase agreement with Adani Green Energy at 8.26 US cents/kWh.
Mid-Late 2024
Delivery trucks carrying turbines and equipment to Mannar are met with escalating protests over flooding risks, disruptions to migratory bird pathways, and mineral-sand mining impacts.
January 2025
Newly elected government announces intent to cancel the existing tariff agreement while clarifying the project itself will continue; environmentalists welcome tariff review but worry about lack of full project suspension.
Early 2025
Government forms a cabinet-appointed Negotiations Committee and a separate Project Committee to renegotiate terms from scratch; tariff talks stall over proposed rupee-settlement and demands to cut rates below 6 cents/kWh.
12 February 2025
Adani Green Energy formally withdraws from the Mannar and Pooneryn wind power projects in a letter to the Board of Investment, citing unrealistic tariff demands, unresolved environmental clearances, and procedural delays.
Post-February 2025
Sri Lankan government seeks new developers at lower tariff thresholds. Mannar residents continue sit-ins and hartals, demanding full suspension of the wind power expansion and comprehensive environmental and human-rights impact assessments.

Overview of India-Sri Lanka Development Projects (2024-2025)

India’s role in Sri Lanka’s economic and infrastructure development has grown rapidly since the onset of the island’s economic crisis, peaking with over 35 formal agreements and MoUs signed between December 2024 and April 2025 under President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s administration. These span critical domains such as defense, energy, digital infrastructure, housing, public administration, and regional connectivity, and include both grant- and loan-based initiatives¹.

Notable projects during this period include:

· Jaffna International Airport (JIA) expansion

· Development of Trincomalee as an energy hub

· Cross-border power grid and multi-product petroleum pipeline

· Acceleration of the Sampur Solar Power Plant

· Construction of 10,000 houses for Indian-origin Tamils

· Improvements to railway and port infrastructure (Kankesanthurai Port, Maho-Anuradhapura railway line)

· Digital identity and e-governance initiatives

· High-impact community and healthcare projects in the North-East and plantation regions

Collectively, these projects are framed by both governments as serving Sri Lanka's national development, energy security, and reconciliation goals. However, questions persist about whether the Tamil community-who bore the main brunt of the conflict and remains vulnerable to land, identity, and power struggles-has been adequately and meaningfully involved in decision-making processes around these projects.

Key India–Sri Lanka Projects Touching Tamil-Majority Areas (2024–2025): Consultation Summary

Jaffna International Airport Expansion

Location: Jaffna, Northern Province
Date: 2024–2025 (ongoing)
Consultation: Limited to government announcements; no published record of direct local consultation
Evidence of Engagement: General statements about boosting regional benefit; no specifics on community input
Allegations: Civil society alleges lack of transparency in procurement; no SIA/EIA or consultation documents released
Contested Land Involvement: Yes
Social/Environmental Impact Assessment: Pending feasibility; SIA/EIA not disclosed

10,000 Houses for Indian-Origin Tamils

Location: Estate areas and Northern Province
Date: 2025
Consultation: Meeting with Indian-Origin Tamil (IOT) leaders from the plantation sector during Prime Minister Modi’s visit; separate from Northeast Tamil politicians
Evidence of Engagement: High-profile engagement with IOT civil representatives cited in government reports
Allegations: None officially stated, but Northeast Tamil leaders note persistent marginalization
Contested Land Involvement: No
Social/Environmental Impact Assessment: Local participation reported in estate model projects

Trincomalee Energy Hub & Sampur Solar Project

Location: Trincomalee, Eastern Province
Date: December 2024–April 2025
Consultation: No published details of local or Northeast Tamil consultation; discussions held at regional elite-political level only
Evidence of Engagement: MoUs refer broadly to “regional stakeholders” without ethnic or community specificity
Allegations: Tamil parties raise fears of land appropriation; NGOs flag environmental and livelihood risks, citing parallels with Mannar wind farm protests
Contested Land Involvement: Yes
Social/Environmental Impact Assessment: Social and environmental concerns raised; EIA not published for some energy projects

Cross-border Power Grid & Pipeline

Location: North-East corridor
Date: December 2024–April 2025
Consultation: Not disclosed; agreement negotiated at national level
Evidence of Engagement: Both governments reference “inclusive growth,” but detailed community input is missing
Allegations: Civil society flags land acquisition and livelihoods concerns; lack of open SIA/EIA
Contested Land Involvement: Yes
Social/Environmental Impact Assessment: Not officially disclosed

Ferry Services & Kankesanthurai Port Revival

Location: Jaffna
Date: 2024–2025
Consultation: No detailed record; general references to regional benefit
Evidence of Engagement: N/A
Allegations: None direct, but land-use changes prompt civil society questions
Contested Land Involvement: Some
Social/Environmental Impact Assessment: Not disclosed

Defence Cooperation Agreement

Location: Nationwide, with particular impact on Northern and Eastern provinces
Date: April 2025
Consultation: No consultation with Tamil political groups; strong opposition from Tamil Nadu and Sri Lankan Tamil politicians
Evidence of Engagement: Civil protests and condemnation statements by Tamil political and civil society actors
Allegations: Fears of legitimizing military occupation in the Northeast; historical land and military trauma cited
Contested Land Involvement: Yes (indirectly)
Social/Environmental Impact Assessment: N/A

This table shows a recurrent pattern of high-level, elite-driven negotiations with little evidence of structured, transparent community consultation or prior consent involving local Tamil populations, especially for projects in Jaffna, Trincomalee, and other areas with a history of militarization and land contestations.

Community Consultation Mechanisms in Sri Lankan Infrastructure Projects

Sri Lanka’s legal and administrative frameworks for large infrastructure projects include, in principle, requirements for public disclosure and community consultation. The 2016 Right to Information (RTI) Act codifies obligations for ministers responsible for projects exceeding certain value thresholds (over $100,000 for foreign-funded projects) to proactively disclose project information-including budgets, procurement, and impact assessments-in Sinhala, Tamil, and English. Social and Environmental Impact Assessments (SIAs/EIAs) are formally required for projects with significant environmental or social impact.

Despite these formal mechanisms, recent watchdog and think-tank reports paint a bleak picture of actual compliance:

· Transparency levels remain low: In 2023, only 25% of the required information for 60 assessed projects was published online, with just 8% available in Tamil; the rest was primarily in English or Sinhala.

· Community consultation is often tokenistic or absent: Civil groups report that major Indian-backed and other foreign-funded infrastructure projects have typically advanced without genuine local stakeholder engagement, especially in Tamil-majority areas.

· Lack of published SIAs or EIAs: For most recent energy, airport, and port expansion projects affecting the North and East, social and environmental impact documentation is absent from the public domain or not produced in local languages.

· Procurement and land acquisition processes lack clarity: There are persistent and well-documented allegations of opaque procurement (such as unexplained tender restrictions, e.g., in the Jaffna Airport project), and minimal opportunity for affected communities to contest or shape outcomes⁷.

Verdict: Although statutory provisions for community consultation exist in Sri Lanka’s legal architecture, their implementation is consistently subverted by elite-centric, top-down planning models. This is especially the case for projects negotiated as intergovernmental or 'strategic' deals, such as those involving Indian partnership in the North-East, where meaningful local or ethnic-representative consultation is rare.

The Jaffna International Airport Project: Details, Transactional Dynamics, and Stakeholder Inclusion

Project Context and Recent Developments

The Jaffna International Airport (JIA) at Palaly, situated in the heart of Sri Lanka’s Tamil-majority Northern Province, is emblematic of post-war state-led efforts to catalyze regional economic integration and reconciliation. Initially redeveloped in 2019 with co-funding from India and the Sri Lankan government, by 2024-2025, its further expansion-including a new terminal (approx. Rs. 600 million) and a potential runway augmentation-became a flagship project for the new government².

Indian involvement has been both technical and financial (initially for infrastructure upgrades, and later in the context of broader economic cooperation), but the terminal and expansion plans for 2024-2025 are described as government of Sri Lanka-funded, with procurement under state control.

Stakeholder and Community Engagement

Despite the project's regional economic rationale (boosting connectivity, tourism, and potential trade), there is an absence of documented, structured consultation or consent process involving local Tamil populations or civil society. The available evidence consists of:

· Government announcements and tender documents: These primarily reference economic benefits for the region but do not highlight any mechanism for input or oversight by local inhabitants, district councils, or NE Tamil political parties.

· Media reporting and civil society perspectives: Multiple news and civil society sources note that the expansion plans were communicated as fait accompli, with opportunities for feedback limited to after-the-fact commentary or, at best, indirect participation via elected local authorities; these forums have not been systematically documented in Tamil or English media for the 2024-2025 period².

· Exclusion in consultancy tenders: Notably, the government specified that only bidders from countries outside the Colombo FIR (excluding India, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Australia, Indonesia) may submit feasibility proposals, citing neutrality and conflict of interest concerns. This design reinforces central government control and limits opportunities for local advocacy or input into the scope and nature of expansion work³.

Land and Social Impact Issues

Jaffna Airport, as with many post-war state projects, sits atop land historically subject to militarization, displacement, and ethnic contestation. There is no published Social Impact Assessment or Environmental Impact Assessment for the 2024-2025 expansion. Civil society monitoring has repeatedly asked for disclosures that would allow meaningful community input, especially regarding issues of:

· Resettlement and land rights of previously displaced Tamil families

· Environmental and economic impacts on surrounding communities

· Inclusion of local business, labor, and cultural preservation interests

In summary, the practical involvement of the local Tamil community-either as homeowner-claimants, workers, culturally-attached users, or representative political entities-has been minimal to nonexistent during the current cycle of JIA’s development.

Tamil Political Representatives’ Involvement in Project Planning

Recent Engagements and Public Positions

While there is evidence of periodic meetings between Indian officials, the Sri Lankan national government, and Tamil-origin leaders from the plantation sector, the inclusion of elected Tamil MPs from the North and East-who represent the core conflict-affected constituencies-has been limited and largely ceremonial or consultative:

· Meetings with PM Modi in April 2025: Representatives of Northern and Eastern Tamil political parties (Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi, All Ceylon Tamil Congress, People’s Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam, and others) met with the Indian PM during his state visit. Discussions focused on the lack of a durable political solution for the Tamil people, the need for India’s continued involvement (especially referencing the Indo-Lanka Accord), and serious concerns about ongoing state-backed land grabs and military encroachment. Leaders specifically requested that India encourage the conduct of long-postponed Provincial Council elections as a prerequisite for meaningful power devolution.

· Exclusion from project planning: These engagements have been situated largely in the realm of “political will” dialogues, without concrete mechanisms for NE Tamil MPs or regional councils to contribute to, approve, or shape the specifics of infrastructure planning, including priorities, impact assessment, or grievance mechanisms.

· Hill Country Tamil representation: Engagements with the Indian-origin Tamil community and their parliamentary representatives (e.g., during the housing project rollout) are more visible, but apply primarily to the plantation sector rather than the conflict-affected North-East, which has distinct and more acute needs¹⁰.

Disconnected Promises and Disappointment

Recent assessments by international observers (such as the UK Home Office) and Tamil civil society critique the national government's unfulfilled promises regarding reconciliation, land release, and power devolution, noting that Tamil MPs’ advocacy seldom results in practical inclusion in state or donor-led planning for development projects¹¹.

Civil Society and Grassroots Tamil Perspectives

Demands and Critique

Tamil civil society organizations-both local and in the diaspora-consistently emphasize several key demands for development and reconciliation:

· Structural Change and Power Devolution: Advocacy around the need for a new constitution, meaningful federalism, and genuine devolution of political, economic, land, and security powers to the Tamil-majority North-East, as a precondition for any sustainable development.

· Land Rights and Demilitarization: Calls to cease land acquisition by state agencies or the military, return occupied lands, and end the use of archaeology and wildlife preservation laws as pretexts for appropriating Tamil lands⁷.

· Social and Environmental Safeguards: Demands for proper Environmental and Social Impact Assessments, including the right to informed consultation and consent for all major development projects, especially those that affect traditional livelihoods and ecological systems¹².

· Inclusive and Transparent Implementation: Insistence on transparency, public oversight of procurement, and community-based monitoring for ongoing projects, with full disclosure in Tamil and accessible forms⁷.

Lived Experience and Civil Society Evidence

Grassroots voices-documented through protests, open letters, and ongoing local reporting-illustrate a recurrent sense of alienation from development planning. Some examples include:

· Land and environmental protests: Demonstrations against wind power projects in Mannar (by the Adani Group) and mining proposals, where local communities allege exclusion from planning and decision-making, and raise alarm over risks to livelihoods and environmentally sensitive habitats⁷.

· Valikamam North Land Restitution Protests: Large-scale peaceful marches and petitions in Jaffna protesting continued military occupation of ancestral lands, with parallel calls for development projects to be subject to local consent, restitution, and benefit-sharing¹³.

· Open letters to Indian leaders: Submissions by Northern and Eastern Tamil civil society leaders-including academics, professionals, and grassroots activists-seek India’s advocacy for elected provincial governments and for an approach to development that recognizes the distinct socio-economic and cultural needs of Tamils¹⁴.

Civil society consensus is that, absent meaningful local participation, large-scale infrastructure projects run the risk of perpetuating the very marginalization and dispossession they aim to remedy.

Transparency, Disclosure, and Allegations of Forced Development

Transparency Deficits and Information Gaps

Despite the RTI Act, critical watchdog investigations (notably by Verité Research and the Centre for Policy Alternatives) show systematic transparency failures:

· Disclosure is incomplete and linguistically exclusionary: Only a small minority of project documents are available in Tamil, making scrutiny by affected communities and their representatives extremely difficult.

· Procurement and contracting lack public oversight: Examples include restricted consulting tenders (e.g., at JIA), and non-disclosure of contract terms for energy and pipeline projects.

· SIAs/EIAs either not done, not disclosed, or lacking local consultation: Social or environmental impacts for many projects are evaluated after agreements are signed; public hearings are rare or perfunctory.

Forced Development Allegations

There are repeated allegations-primarily from Tamil political and civil society sources, as well as international observers-that development initiatives are pushed forward without the consent or meaningful engagement of local communities, sometimes in ways that violate their property, environmental, and cultural rights:

· Land acquisition and resettlement policies: Communities claim that laws and the power of eminent domain are used to relocate, appropriate, or restrict access to traditional lands, often without fair compensation, consultation, or respect for cultural practices. This is especially prevalent where military or “national heritage” justifications are invoked¹³¹⁵.

· Top-down, militarized control in the North-East: The heavy military presence and continued occupation of once-private land creates structural obstacles to genuine local engagement, and undermines trust and legitimacy for any state-backed or bilateral development project¹⁶.

Forced Development and International Norms

Under international law, including ILO Convention 169 and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), affected populations are entitled to free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for projects that affect their lands and resources, robust social and environmental impact assessment, and the right to participate in benefit-sharing¹⁷. Sri Lanka has not domesticated these frameworks; civil society organizations and international monitors routinely note that practice falls well short of these standards¹⁸.

Political Reactions and Positions

Tamil Political Parties and Representatives

The main political parties representing Sri Lanka’s Northern and Eastern Tamils-such as ITAK, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), and others-have repeatedly and publicly criticized the continued exclusion of Tamils from decision-making, both on economic development and power devolution:

· Call for realization of Indo-Lanka Accord: Tamil leaders emphasize that, despite India’s pivotal role in brokering the 1987 Accord, neither the Accord’s commitments on provincial council devolution nor its underlying intent of resolving the “Tamil question” have been honored in practice or concretely reflected in present-day development planning.

· Opposition to defense pacts without Tamil input: The signing of a defense cooperation agreement between India and Sri Lanka has provoked strong opposition from Tamil Nadu leaders (both within India and the global Tamil community) as well as from Sri Lankan Tamil politicians, who frame the move as a betrayal, citing the military’s role in mass atrocities and persistent occupation of Tamil areas¹⁹²⁰.

Government and Indian Diplomatic Stance

Both the Sri Lankan and Indian governments have, in public statements, recognized the "special needs" of Tamils and the importance of inclusive growth and reconciliation⁵. Yet, policy and practical actions on the ground-as documented in project implementation-have not matched these rhetorical commitments with institutionalized consultation, participatory monitoring, or independent oversight mechanisms involving Tamil representatives at either political or civil society level.

Land Acquisition Disputes, Social and Environmental Impact

Persistent Land Conflicts

Even 16 years after the end of the civil war, land acquisition remains among the most volatile, unresolved issues affecting the Tamil community in the North and East:

· Military and state occupation of land: Large tracts of land-initially expropriated during hostilities under the guise of security-continue under military or government agency occupation. Pledges to release land back to rightful Tamil owners have been sporadic and incomplete⁷¹³.

· Use of law and heritage as pretext for appropriation: Archaeological, wildlife, and forest conservation authorities are accused of using their mandates to seize and retain land previously owned and inhabited by Tamils, further undermining prospects for return, resettlement, and autonomous local economic development¹³.

· Marginalization in national planning: New development projects (including energy, port, and infrastructure) frequently intersect with contested or still-occupied land, deepening feelings of dispossession.

Impact Assessments: Gaps and Consequences

For Indian-backed and other major projects, there is an acute absence of published, locally relevant social and environmental impact assessments. This absence directly contradicts international best practice and the obligations built into many multilateral and bilateral funding agreements. Where SIAs or EIAs are carried out, they are often not released in Tamil, nor is public input sought or recorded, compounding community distrust and heightening tensions around development interventions¹²⁷.

International Norms, Legal Frameworks, and Potential Violations

Key Standards

Globally, affected populations are protected under a suite of international instruments regarding consultation, land, and development rights:

· ILO Convention No. 169 (not ratified by Sri Lanka): Asserts the right of indigenous and tribal communities to control their economic, social, and cultural development, including lands and resources¹⁷.

· UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP): Proclaims rights to free, prior, and informed consent in all projects affecting their lands, redress for dispossession, and participation in decision-making.

· UN Human Rights Council/UN Special Procedures: Routinely urge Sri Lanka to align with these instruments and address legacies of impunity, discrimination, and disenfranchisement, including in development contexts²¹.

· UN SDG Fund and Peacebuilding Windows: Promote local ownership, participation, and inclusive governance as core principles of sustainable, peaceful development²².

Sri Lankan Legal and Policy Status

Despite rhetorical commitments to inclusive development and reconciliation, Sri Lanka has not enacted a legal or policy framework aligned with UNDRIP or ILO 169 for its indigenous peoples or ethnic minorities, including the Tamil community¹⁸. A new draft law for indigenous rights is under consideration (primarily affecting the Vedda population), but offers no comprehensive safeguards for land, consent, or participation of the Tamil community in the North-East.

Practice Versus Principle

A wide range of international and local assessments conclude that Sri Lanka persistently falls short of its procedural and substantive obligations under international law regarding indigenous, tribal, and minority rights in the context of development. This shortfall is most acute in:

· Lack of FPIC for land- or resource-affecting projects

· Failure to undertake or disclose social/environmental impact studies with community input

· Systematic exclusion from project planning and benefit-sharing for vulnerable minorities

· Opaque, top-down project implementation

The result is a pattern of de facto violations of international norms, even if national law has not been updated to reflect international best practice.

The Role of Oversight Bodies and the International Community

UN Human Rights Mechanisms

The United Nations Human Rights Council, through successive resolutions and mandates-including that of the OHCHR Sri Lanka Accountability Project-has documented ongoing rights violations and exclusion of Tamils from meaningful decision-making, and has called for:

· Accountability for past abuses and present discrimination

· Transformative action to end impunity and deliver justice for Tamil victims

· Concrete steps for demilitarization, land restitution, and development inclusion²¹.

Recent UN SDG Fund and UNDP interventions emphasize peacebuilding, reintegration, and the need for local leadership in development planning, but actual implementation is constrained by lack of state cooperation and limited international leverage²³.

Local Watchdogs and Civil Society Oversight

Local organizations-including the Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Law and Society Trust, and others-play a critical role in raising visibility for transparency deficits, land injustice, and the lack of social impact assessment for development projects in the Northern and Eastern Provinces¹². Their consistent critique is that Sri Lankan (and, by extension, Indian) development projects remain insufficiently accountable to the people that they most directly affect, especially Tamils in post-war zones.

Conclusion

Over the last two years (2024-2025), the quantum and velocity of India-supported development projects in Sri Lanka’s Northern and Eastern Provinces have increased dramatically. However, the Tamil community’s meaningful involvement-apart from sporadic political meetings and highly controlled public events-remains deeply limited. While housing projects in plantation areas stand out for their engagement with the Indian-origin Tamil community, large-scale infrastructure, energy, and airport projects in the traditional North-East heartland show a consistent lack of transparency, structured community consultation, and adherence to international best practice.

Persistent allegations from civil society, local political representatives, and international observers point to a troubling pattern: that of forced or top-down development, insufficient social and environmental impact consideration, and systematic exclusion of NE Tamil voices. These practices are at odds with the requirements of procedural justice and the rights enshrined in both international human rights instruments and Sri Lanka’s own statutory commitments.

The result is a landscape where economic development proceeds apace, but reconciliation, justice, and local ownership stagnate-leaving unresolved grievances, especially in the spheres of land rights, cultural preservation, and devolution of power. Unless India and Sri Lanka move urgently to institutionalize inclusive, transparent, and accountable consultation processes-grounded in the active participation and consent of the Tamil community-development in the North and East risks being experienced not as a tool of healing, but as yet another round of marginalization.

Recommendations for Rights-Based, Inclusive Development

· Institutionalize FPIC and transparent consultation for all projects in the North-East.

· Ensure all project documents, impact assessments, and tender details are available in Tamil and widely accessible.

· Integrate social and environmental impact assessments at the earliest stages of project planning; ensure SIA/EIA findings drive project shaping, and not merely compliance.

· Guarantee that Tamil elected representatives, civil society, and affected communities are empowered to participate in project monitoring, grievance redress, and benefit-sharing.

· Conduct independent audits and oversight-potentially with UN, Commonwealth, or other international involvement-on the quality of consultation, land acquisition, and rights compliance for all major infrastructure projects affecting the North-East.

· Prioritize long-delayed land restitution and demilitarization to create the material conditions for genuine local participation in regional development.

In sum, the path to sustainable, just development in Sri Lanka’s North and East cannot bypass the lived realities, aspirations, and rights-based demands of its Tamil population. The responsibilities of the state, India, and the international community must be measured not by agreements signed or ground broken, but by the degree to which the people most affected are heard, respected, and empowered.

References (28)

6. Part 1: The 35 India-Sri Lanka Agreements under President Anura Kumara .... https://www.sinhalanet.net/part-1-the-35-india-sri-lanka-agreements-under-president-anura-kumara-dissanayake-dec-2024-apr-2025

21. Human Rights Watch Briefing on the Human Rights Situation in Sri Lanka. https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/08/18/human-rights-watch-briefing-on-the-human-rights-situation-in-sri-lanka

18. Sri Lanka to Introduce New Law for Indigenous Community. https://ceylondailynews.lk/home/2024/08/28/indigenous-community/

19. Vaiko condemns India-Sri Lanka defence agreement, cites Tamil genocide. https://www.tamilguardian.com/content/vaiko-condemns-india-sri-lanka-defence-agreement-cites-tamil-genocide

20. MDMK leader Vaiko condemns India-Sri Lanka defence MoU. https://www.dailymirror.lk/top-story/MDMK-leader-Vaiko-condemns-India-Sri-Lanka-defence-MoU/155-306187

13. The Ongoing Struggle for Land Rights in the North - Groundviews. https://groundviews.org/2025/07/18/the-ongoing-struggle-for-land-rights-in-the-north/

14. Lankan Tamil civil society seeks justice from Modi - Mingooland. https://mingooland.com/2023/07/lankan-tamil-civil-society-seeks-justice-from-modi/

15. State-backed land disputes remain key barrier to peace in North-East .... https://www.tamilguardian.com/content/land-disputes-remain-major-obstacle-peacebuilding-sri-lankas-north-east-un-report-finds

16. Analysis: Post-War Ground Realities of Dissolving Territories and .... https://globaljustice.queenslaw.ca/news/analysis-post-war-ground-realities-of-dissolving-territories-and-protracted-displacement-of-eelam-tamils-in-sri-lanka

17. C169 - Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169). https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/nrmlx_en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C169

2. Jaffna International Airport to get Rs. 600 m terminal. https://www.themorning.lk/articles/Mv5pjMqIcIrTEbP2XMl5

3. Bids Open for Expansion of Jaffna and Bandaranaike International .... https://www.travelvoice.lk/12_30_24_02/

4. PM Modi Meets Tamil Community In Sri Lanka, Offers Support For .... https://www.news18.com/india/pm-modi-meets-indian-origin-tamils-in-sri-lanka-offers-support-for-construction-of-10000-houses-ws-kl-9288288.html

5. India SL Brief Website.docx. https://www.mea.gov.in/Portal/ForeignRelation/India-Sri-Lanka-2024.pdf

7. Land Issues in the Northern and Eastern Provinces in Sri Lanka. https://www.cpalanka.org/land-issues-in-sri-lanka/

8. India - Sri Lanka Joint Statement: Fostering Partnerships for a Shared .... https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/38797

9. MDMK leader Vaiko condemns defence cooperation MoU between India, Sri .... https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/mdmk-leader-vaiko-condemns-defence-cooperation-mou-between-india-sri-lanka/article69419151.ece

10. Hill Country Tamils aspire to a Non-Territorial Community Council. https://www.ft.lk/columns/Hill-Country-Tamils-aspire-to-a-Non-Territorial-Community-Council/4-748676

11. Country policy and information note: Tamil separatism, Sri Lanka .... https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sri-lanka-country-policy-and-information-notes/country-policy-and-information-note-tamil-separatism-sri-lanka-august-2025-accessible

12. Report on the Right to Development of Children and Future Generations. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/development/sr/cfi-2024-reports/subm-2024-sr-development-cso-law-lst-lanka.pdf

1. India-Sri Lanka Agreement on Key Infrastructure Projects Announced. https://newshub.lk/en/2024/12/16/india-sri-lanka-agreement-on-key-infrastructure-projects-announced/

22. முகப்பு . https://www.sdc.gov.lk/ta

23. UN Sri Lanka SDG Fund . https://srilanka.un.org/en/299091-un-sri-lanka-sdg-fund

Tamil Community Exclusion in India–Sri Lanka Development Projects