In a Panel Discussion on ’17 Point Agreement: Liberation or Occupation of Tibet’ organised by Core Group for Tibetan Cause at the India International Center on Monday, the overwhelming majority agreed that the ’17 Point Agreement’ is inherently contradictory; that the Chinese have violated every single provision of the ‘agreement’; and that Chinese presence in Tibet is an occupation.

Excerpts from speech of Mr. Naresh Mathur, a Supreme Court Lawyer. Mr. Mathur talked about the legality of the 17-Point Agreement according to established norms of Judiciary.

The 17 Point Agreement is one agreement that has not been tested in any international forum at any point of time.

Citing Point 15 of the 17-Point Agreement which mandates a military and administrative committee set up by Central People’s Government to ensure that the agreement is implemented, Mr. Mathur wondered if any such committee every existed.

Stressing the established norms of having an agreement, he said that the sine qua non of an agreement is that there has to be an informed consent and there should be valid execution of the agreement; otherwise the agreement is void ab initio.

After the agreement, the first thing that His Holiness the Dalai Lama did when he entered India was to repudiate the so called ‘agreement’.

According to the 1914 Shimla Agreement with the British, Tibet was as free as any other country from 1912-1951. The Shimla Accord provided China suzerainty on certain parts of Tibet. It clearly mentioned that if China doesn’t sign the agreement, it will effectively end its any claim on Tibet. Chinese never came back till 1951. So, legally Tibet was an independent country way back in 1914. Various UN resolution from 1959 to 1995 have highlighted the duplicity of Chinese claim on Tibet.

The Supreme Court lawyer said that the population of China constitutes of 94 % Hans and 6 % non-Hans. The 6% constitutes 53 different nationalities including Tibetans and Xinjiangs and they own more than half of China’s land.

Citing the multiple and complete violation of the 17-Point Agreement on which they justify their occupation of Tibet, Mr Mathur cited various articles and their violation. For example Point 3 of the the Agreement says that the Tibetan people have the right of exercising national regional autonomy; Point 4 says that the existing political system in Tibet will not be altered; Point 5 and 6 states that the status, functions and powers of the Panchen Lama and the Dalai Lama shall be maintained; Point 9 mentions that the spoken and the written language and school education of the Tibetan nationality will be developed; Point 10 promised that the Tibetan agriculture, livestock raising, industry and commerce will be developed….

Mathur said that even the seals used to sign the agreement are reminiscent of forceful and illegal conditions under which the agreement was signed. He concluded that the Chinese have been completely hypocritical and unreliable in their dealings with Tibet.

The Chinese fear that if they will give up to the Tibetan claims, other minorities will start asking for more autonomy and may be freedom. That the Chinese are worried and confused about how to deal with Tibet.

Later, answering a question from the audience about what hope does Tibet have of gaining its independent status, he said that the there are resolutions lying in the UN and they can be revived. He quickly added, ‘UN is a giant municipal corporation. Very little is available there for Tibet.’

Related Stories:

We can never live under China: Tsewang Rigzin
Tibetans divided by force not by choice: Lobsang Sangay

 

Comment