1) Re. this thread on an issue of obvious – and now again topical – importance. In our late 2017 research in the East we visited & interviewed many villagers, monks, maulavis, local govt officials etc. in #Deegavapi and other sites with known land and/or archaeology issues

2) Our 2018 report highlighted Thoppur/Selvanagar, which illustrates issue impact on Sinhala-Muslim relations. Close by is Vilgamwehera Maha Seya, a reconstructed dagoba inside a then under-construction retreat centre on 49.5 acres of land gazetted by Archaeology Dept in Nov 2014

3) Site itself is said to cover only 3 acres, surrounding area being farmland where Selvanagar inhabitants previously cultivated & grazed cattle. Villagers stated that official survey begun in 2013 was carried out on understanding that they would retain their land.

4) Subsequently inhabitants were informed their land would be retained within the archaeological site, with no compensation offered thus far. Villagers also reported they had lobbied GA and Chief Minister on the issue, to no effect.

5) 2nd nearby 1000-acre site thought to contain temple ruins was gazetted in spring 2017 & acquired by Forestry Dept. Violence flared in Aug 2017 when villagers reported that ‘Sinhalese from neighbouring villages came and attacked our houses because of the vihara...

6) which they said we were going to smash up. 2 buses came & people were armed with swords & iron bars. Our mosque announced we should not use force and advised people to run towards Thopur’. Muslim community leaders visited the nearby dagoba & held talks with the resident monk.

7) as a result of which the assault was called off.’ Then site caretaker (wartime ex-Navy officer) defended 'reclaiming' dagoba ruins & surrounding area in view of their historical and archaeological value. While acknowledging this had created ‘certain problems’ he argued that

8) measures were now in place to ensure non-repetition of recent ‘incidents’. Also claimed that only people living in stupa’s immediate surroundings would be ‘moved out’, also argued that local communities had ‘encroached’ the site and had no formal, legal entitlement to the land

9) Re. ‘Buddhification’ of areas, throughout province both police & security forces were regularly reported to have left Buddhist statues on land or at security checkpoints occupied during war. Reportedly, when they depart and, for example, Muslim families return to their land

10) these generally remove the statues. The esult, per a Battticaloa politician, was that ‘BBS soon appear on the ground’. Same also appeared to speak for many in the minority communities when suggesting aim of all this was simply to ‘show everyone this is a Buddhist country'

11) In interviews with Archaeology Dept & local govt officials, suggestions for alternative approaches to meeting twin objectives of preserving a site’s physical integrity & reducing the ‘conflict trigger’ impact of current gazetting provisions were generally well received.

12) In particular, suggestion that area of gazetted land surrounding a site could be limited to that strictly necessary to maintaining & securing its integrity was viewed positively & deemed worthy of ‘further policy consideration’.

13) Here, even tho’ from a wholly different context, for #lka policy advocacy purposes might be worth considering approach adopted in eg UK at historical locations such as Stonehenge. (Legally speaking approach defined in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979.)

14) Applied to sites in the East, adoption of such an approach would significantly reduce their land ‘needs’ and thus help mitigate many (tho’ not all) resulting land conflicts. Obviously, all this assumes that reason can trump theocracy. But still, perhaps worth a try, noh?