Explained: The Katchatheevu Island Which PM Modi Spoke About During His Reply To The No-Confidence Motion

During his reply to the no confidence motion, Prime Minister Narendra Modi targeted the Congress for giving away the Katchatheevu island to Sri Lanka. He also mentioned that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) has been asking him to get the island back and Chief Minister MK Stalin had written letters to him on the issue.

He said, "Ask those who have gone out, what is Kachchatheevu? Somebody ask them what is Katchatheevu. These people talk big. Today I will say what is Kachchatheevu. These people write big stuff and try to mislead the nation.

"These DMK people, their government, their Chief Minister, write letters to me even now and say Modiji, please bring back Kachchatheevu.

"Where is Katchatheevu? Who did it? This island between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka, who gave it to another country? When did they give it? Was there no Bharat Mata there? Was that not a part of Ma Bharati? And you broke this also. Who was there at that time?

"This happened under the leadership of Smt Indira Gandhi. Congress has had a history of breaking Ma Bharati into numerous parts.

"And it is this Congress which is talking about love for India and Indians."

History Of The Island And How It Became Part Of Sri Lanka

The Katchatheevu island is a 1.15 sq km uninhabited island lying between Rameswaram and Neduntheevu (Delft Island) of Sri Lanka in the Palk Strait. The only structure on the island is the St Anthony's Church which is visited by both Indians and Sri Lankans for the annual festival. Indians do not need a visa for this.

While it was a part of the territories the kingdom of Jaffna in the early medieval period, during the 17th century it became part of the territory of the Raja of Ramnad.

During British rule, it was considered to be a part of the Madras Presidency but Ceylon made claims to it. The dispute continued after independence and India gave the island to Sri Lanka through an agreement in 1974.

Why Do Indian Fishermen Want The Island?

Indian fishermen say that it is a traditional fishing area with the availability of good catch and having the island marked as Indian territory would give them seven to ten nautical miles of additional fishing grounds, which would greatly reduce the number of arrests by the Sri Lankan Navy.

Further, they say that they incur huge losses when the Sri Lankan Navy arrests them as their boats are seized.

Many arrests in the past few months were in the area between Katchatheevu and Neduntheevu.

Not all fishermen intentionally stray into Sri Lankan waters, they contend. The boundary is not always discernible and sometimes they inadvertently enter the neighbouring country's waters due to engine failure and adverse weather conditions.

Indian fishermen are compelled to venture in the area because the Indian side is depleted of fish.

The 1974 And 1976 Agreements

The 1974 agreement was to fix the maritime boundary in the Palk Strait.

Article 4, 5 and 6 of the agreement state the following:

"Each country shall have sovereignty and exclusive jurisdiction and control over the waters, the islands, the continental shelf and the subsoil thereof, falling on its own side of the aforesaid boundary.

"Subject to the foregoing, Indian fishermen and pilgrims will enjoy access to visit Kachchativu as hitherto, and will not be required by Sri Lanka to obtain travel documents or visas for these purposes.

"The vessels of Sri Lanka and India will enjoy in each other's waters such rights as they have traditionally enjoyed therein." ( Italics mine)

A reply to the Sri Lankan Parliament by the then Foreign minister Rohitha Bogollagama in 2008 stated his country's position on these articles as "The 1974 Agreement regarding historic waters between Sri Lanka and India in the Palk Strait and the Palk Bay formally confirmed Sri Lanka’s sovereignty over the Island.

"By this Article, only navigational rights of the vessels of both Sri Lanka and India over each others waters have been preserved.

"The preparatory notes leading to the finalization of the rights of the two Parties, clearly manifests that the rights of pilgrims under Article 5 were restricted to attend the annual feast of the church and the rights of access of fishermen was restricted to dry their nets and catch.

"Therefore the provisions in Article 5 and 6 taken together do not confer any fishing rights on the Indian fishermen or vessels to engage in fishing in Sri Lankan waters."

Following this, another agreement was signed in 1976 to demarcate the maritime boundary in the Bay of Bengal and the Gulf of Mannar.

Article 5 of this agreement states :

"1. Each Party shall have sovereignty over the historic waters and the territorial sea, as well as the islands falling on its side of the aforesaid boundary.

2. Each Party shall have sovereign rights and exclusive jurisdiction over the Continental Shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) as well as over their resources, whether living or non-living, falling on its side of the aforesaid boundary.

3. Each Party shall respect rights of navigation through its territorial sea and exclusive economic zone in accordance with its laws and regulations and the rules of international law."

Bogollagama's reply cites an Exchange of Letters with the then Foreign Secretary of India to state that Indian fishermen are not allowed to fish in Sri Lankan waters and vice versa unless the respective governments grant permission.

He said that the first paragraph of the Exchange of Letters states, "Fishing vessels and fishermen of India shall not engage in fishing in the historic waters, the territorial sea and the EEZ of Sri Lanka nor shall the fishing vessels and fishermen of Sri Lanka engage in fishing in the historic waters, the territorial sea and the EEZ of India, without the express permission of Sri Lanka or India, as the case may be.”

According to an article by Indian Express, Katchatheevu lies at the boundary of the EEZs leading to a question over fishing rights. It states that during the war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Indian fishermen routinely crossed over into Sri Lankan waters. Some of them used large trawlers which led to overfishing and damage of the nets and boats of Sri Lankan fishermen.

This has led to opposition from the Sri Lankan fishermen.

Further it states that the number of arrests of Indian fishermen increased after the end of the war as the Sri Lankan Navy started patrolling the area more frequently.

Position Of Political Parties In Tamil Nadu

Both the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) want the government of India to get back the island.

A number of resolutions have been moved in the state assembly and former chief minister J Jayalalithaa moved the Supreme Court in 2012.

They have said that it was wrong on the part of Indira Gandhi's government to have given away the island without consulting the state and have challenged the legality of the transfer as it was not done through the Parliament.

The Tamil Nadu unit of the BJP also wants the government to get back the island.

Position of the Government of India

The government of India had stated before the Supreme Court that the island could not be considered to have been ceded as it was always under dispute.

In 2014, the then Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi had said, “Katchatheevu went to Sri Lanka by an agreement in 1974… How can it be taken back today? If you want Katchatheevu back, you will have to go to war to get it back.”

Solutions That Have Been Proposed

Some of the solutions that have been proposed are taking the island on lease, joint management of the Palk Bay fishing area and encouraging Indian fishermen to move towards the Bay of Bengal for deep sea fishing.