A view of Katchatheevu island in Sri Lanka.
| Photo Credit: L. Balachandar

The story so far: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on March 31 raised again the controversial matter of Katchatheevu, a few weeks ahead of the Lok Sabha poll in Tamil Nadu. Citing a report in a daily and posting it on “X” (formerly Twitter), he said: “Eye-opening and startling! New facts reveal how Congress callously gave away Katchatheevu….” Subsequently, the State BJP and the AIADMK sharpened their attacks on the DMK and the Congress while the responses were swift too. Even though almost 50 years have lapsed since the signing of the original agreement in 1974, the matter comes back to the fore as political parties use it for attacking their adversaries. On March 16, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and DMK chief M.K. Stalin contended that Katchatheevu was ceded to Sri Lanka despite strong protests by the DMK. He asked the Prime Minister what steps were taken by the latter to retrieve the islet. About one-and-a-half months ago, Katchatheevu was in limelight as, in late February, fishermen associations in Ramanathapuram district boycotted the annual two-day festival, as a mark of protest against the Sri Lankan Government’s continuing arrests of Indian fishermen on charges of poaching.

When did Katchatheevu become a part of Sri Lanka?

During June 26-28, 1974, the then Prime Ministers of India and Sri Lanka, Indira Gandhi and Sirima R.D. Bandaranaike, signed an agreement to demarcate the boundary between the two countries in the historic waters from Palk Strait to Adam’s Bridge. A joint statement issued on June 28, 1974, stated that a boundary had been defined “in conformity with the historical evidence, legal international principles and precedents.” It also pointed out that “this boundary falls one mile off the west coast of the uninhabited” Katchatheevu. The pact brought to a close the talks held between the two sides since October 1921. Initially, the negotiations were held between the governments of the then Madras and Ceylon.

How important has been Kachatheevu to the fisherfolk?

Fisherfolk of the two countries have been traditionally using the islet for fishing. Though this feature was acknowledged in the 1974 agreement, the supplemental pact in March 1976 made it clear that fishing vessels and fishermen of the two countries “shall not engage” in fishing in the historic waters, territorial sea and exclusive zone or exclusive economic zone of either of the countries “without the express permission of Sri Lanka or India.”

St. Anthony’s Church there holds an annual festival, either in February or March, drawing devotees from both sides of the Palk Bay, a tradition which has been going on.

What triggered the negotiations between India and Sri Lanka?

Sri Lanka claimed sovereignty over Kachatheevu on the ground that the Portuguese who had occupied the island during 1505-1658 CE had exercised jurisdiction over the islet. India’s contention was that the erstwhile Raja of Ramnad [Ramanathapuram] had possession of it as part of his zamin. According to a news item published by The Hindu on March 6, 1968 which was based on the interview of the erstwhile Raja Ramanatha Sethupathi, Kachatheevu was under the jurisdiction of the zamin “from time immemorial” and it was the “last post’ of the Ramnad Estate. He added that the zamin had been collecting taxes till 1947 when it was taken over by the State government following the Zamindari Abolition Act. However, replying to the debate on the matter in Lok Sabha in July 1974, the then External Affairs Minister Swaran Singh asserted that the decision had been taken after “exhaustive research of historical and other records” on the islet.

How was the 1974 agreement received?

The present demand for the Katchatheevu retrieval traces its origin to the opposition that the pact generated in 1974. During the debates in both Houses of Parliament in July 1974, most of the Opposition including the DMK, AIADMK, Jan Sangh, Swatantara and the Socialist Party, staged walk outs in the two Houses. Former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who was the Jan Sangh’s leader, had contended that the decision to transfer the islet had been taken “behind the back” of the people and Parliament. He was supported by Madhu Limaye, veteran Socialist leader. The then Chief Minister M.Karunanidhi, even in 1973 when the talk of the islet transfer had been doing rounds, had urged Indira Gandhi that the popular feeling was in favour of retaining Katchatheevu which “belonged to India and not to Tamil Nadu alone,” according to a report published by The Hindu on October 17, 1973. Three months later, he wrote a letter reiterating the stand, a copy of which was released a day after the 1974 agreement was signed. M. G. Ramachandran, founder of the AIADMK, which was a fledgling party then, had criticised Karunanidhi for “his failure to guide the Centre properly” on the issue and sought his resignation.

When did the issue get a fresh lease of life?

After remaining low nearly for over 15 years, the Katchatheevu issue got revived in August 1991 with the then Chief Minister Jayalalithaa demanding retrieval during her Independence Day address. She later modified her demand to one of getting back the islet through “a lease in perpetuity.” The Tamil Nadu Assembly had witnessed a number of debates on the matter. In the last 15 years, both Jayalalithaa and Karunanidhi had approached the Supreme Court on the matter.

What has been the stand of the Union government on the issue?

In August 2013, the Union government told the Supreme Court that the question of retrieval of Kachchatheevu from Sri Lanka did not arise as no territory belonging to India was ceded to Sri Lanka. It contended that the islet was a matter of dispute between British India and Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and there was no agreed boundary, a matter of which was settled through 1974 and 1976 agreements. In December 2022, the Union government, while referring to the two agreements, pointed out in its reply in the Rajya Sabha that Katchatheevu “lies on the Sri Lankan side of the India-Sri Lanka International Maritime Boundary Line.” It added that the matter was sub-judice in the Supreme Court.

In 1974, when it was challenged by an ordinary citizen over recognizing the tiny Katchatheevu island as Sri Lankan territory, the government argued he had no locus standi to interfere in the case.

Fifty years later, Brij Khandelwal, the first petitioner in the Katchatheevu case, says he stands by his belief that no government has any business in diminishing the country’s territory.

The uninhabited island, about 1.6 km long and over 300 metres wide, has shot back into the limelight ahead of the Lok Sabha elections, with the BJP accusing the then Congress government of giving it away to Sri Lanka.

In an exclusive interview with NDTV, Mr Khandelwal recalled why he had put his foot down over the issue.

“I filed this petition in 1974 because there was some talk about a small island of only 200 acres down south being donated as a gift to Sri Lanka. I didn’t like the idea because I thought no government had any business to reduce the territory of India. They can add, but not dilute or diminish the territory of India,” he said.

Read | “Nehru Saw It As Nuisance”: S Jaishankar Doubles Down On Katchatheevu Row

He said he filed a petition in the Delhi High Court in 1974 out of the concern that the island may be used for military purposes in the future if relations soured between the two countries.

“My submission was today relations may be good with Sri Lanka, but tomorrow they could turn sour and hostile. That did happen later in the 80s. So I was very keen and concerned about it… my fear that someday if some hostile government leases out this piece of land and it is used for military purposes, what happens then?”

However, with the Emergency still on and the fundamental rights of the citizens suspended, his arguments faced a fierce response from the government.

Watch | Video: Katchatheevu Island, The New Flashpoint In BJP Vs Opposition

“The government argued that we had no locus standi in the case, we had no business, no link and no direct relations to the Katchatheevu island, therefore we should not be heard. But as a free citizen, with all my fundamental rights intact, I had every business to interfere and raise this issue. I had every right to move around freely on any part of the Indian territory and no government had any business to cut away any part of the land,” said Mr Khandelwal.

But the court wasn’t convinced.

“The court probably decided I really had no locus standi, but more importantly, because the emergency provisions were enforced and I had no fundamental rights, so I could not plead on that ground,” he added.

After the Emergency was lifted, Mr Khandelwal said he did not pursue the matter very strongly because “no government was interested.” “After 1977, when the emergency was lifted and the Janata Party came to power, I told them. But they asked me not to unnecessarily interfere in the relations between the two countries. So I kept quiet,” he added.

Read | “I Replied 21 Times”: S Jaishankar Trashes DMK Claims Over Katchatheevu

The island was part of the Indian territory till 1947 and there was no dispute over the legality of the whole case, he added.

“It was about the magnanimity of the Indira Gandhi government that probably forced her to take this decision. She wanted good relations with Sri Lanka, which didn’t happen and the prime minister later lost,” said Mr Khandelwal.

The government had no solid reason to oppose this case, he said, but the courts were under pressure due to Emergency.

“The question that I had raised in 1974 – they stand well even today and I firmly believe no government has any business to gift any part of India,” he said, adding, “I think the island belongs to us.”

The Katchatheevu row resurfaced after a media report based on an RTI reply received by Tamil Nadu BJP chief K Annamalai on the Indo-Sri Lankan maritime agreement in 1974.

In 1976, after the Tamil Nadu government was dismissed during the Emergency, another pact restricted fishermen of both countries from fishing in each other’s waters. The harassment of Tamil Nadu fishermen by Lankan authorities is a key issue in the state, and the BJP has raised this with an eye on the upcoming Lok Sabha polls.

New Delhi:

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Monday reiterated Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s accusation against the Opposition regarding the Katchatheevu island row stating that the the country’s first Prime Minister, wanted to give away the island to Sri Lanka.

The issue pertains to the year 1974 when the then Indira Gandhi government had accepted the island was a Sri Lankan area under the India-Sri Lankan maritime agreement.

The issue has again resurfaced after a media report based on an RTI reply received by Tamil Nadu BJP chief K Annamalai on the 1974 pact.

PM Modi yesterday shared a statement by late DMK MP Era Sezhiyan expressing anger at the India-Sri Lanka Maritime Agreement signed by the then Indira Gandhi government by which India relinquished its claim on Katchatheevu island and called it “an unholy agreement.”

Addressing a press conference in the national capital, S Jaishankar said, “Today, it is important for the public to know and the people to judge, this issue has been hidden too long from the gaze of the public.”

“… We are talking about 1958 and 1960… The main people in the case wanted to make sure that at least we should get the fishing rights… The island was given away in 1974 and the fishing rights were given away in 1976… One, the most basic recurring (aspect) is the indifference shown by the then central government and the PMs about the territory of India…

“That fact is they simply did not care…,” Mr Jaishankar said in his press conference.

Addressing the press at @BJP4India Headquarters. https://t.co/iiWFiCnPvc

— Dr. S. Jaishankar (Modi Ka Parivar) (@DrSJaishankar) April 1, 2024

“In an observation given by the then PM Jawaharlal Nehru in May 1961, he wrote, ‘I attach no importance at all to this little island and I would have no hesitation in giving up our claim to it. I do not like matters like this pending indefinitely and being raised again and again in parliament.’ So, to Pandit Nehru, this was a little island, it had no importance, he saw it as a nuisance… For him, the sooner you give it away, the better… This view continued on to Indira Gandhi as well…” the Minister added.

He put the Congress in the dock for completely ignoring Indian concerns on the island.

“The PM (Indira Gandhi) is said to have remarked in the AICC meeting that this is a little rock. I am reminded of those days when Pandit Nehru called our northern boundary as a place where not a blade of grass grew. I would like to remind them that after this historic statement by PM Nehru, he never regained the confidence of the country. The same was going to happen to the PM (Indira Gandhi) when she says that this is only a little rock and that there is nothing to worry about the territories of our country.’… So, this is not just one PM… This dismissive attitude…was the historic Congress attitude towards Katchatheevu…” Mr Jaishankar said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)