TLTE — Transformative League of Tamil Eelam logo
VinMin · வின்மின்·A digital homeland
Reading Room
Reflexivity · தற்சிந்தனை

Positionality, honestly.

A PhD-grade artefact cannot pretend to come from nowhere. This page states the standpoint from which TLTE is built, what proximity the author has to the events, how the project is funded, what ethics framework substitutes for a university IRB, and where the conflicts of interest lie.

1 · Standpoint

TLTE is built and maintained by a Tamil diaspora researcher operating in the United Kingdom. The author is a member of the post-2009 diaspora generation — old enough to remember Mullivaikkal in real time, young enough to have no personal investment in any armed-period faction. The project is not authored from a sovereign Tamil voice and does not claim one; it speaks only for Council members who accept the Charter.

2 · Proximity to events

The author has no family role in any armed group, no role in the Sri Lankan state, and no role in any party-political organisation in Sri Lanka, Tamil Nadu, or the diaspora. Family losses during the war exist but are not used as evidentiary content on the site — this is a structural commitment, not a personal one. See /critical-research/unfinished-final-days.

3 · Funding model

TLTE accepts no donations, runs no fundraising, holds no charitable status, and is not incorporated as a non-profit. Infrastructure (domain, hosting, AI gateway) is paid for out of personal funds. There is no grant funding from any state, foundation, or diaspora-political organisation. If that ever changes, the funding line will appear here, dated, before any related work ships.

4 · Ethics framework (in lieu of university IRB)

  • Murad Code (2022) — survivor-centred conduct, applied as a refusal posture: no intake, no naming, no testimony hosting.
  • Berkeley Protocol on Digital Open Source Investigations (2022) — Tier-A discipline, preservation, chain-of-custody.
  • UK GDPR + Data Protection Act 2018 — Article 9 special-category data is structurally refused on the public site; DPO designation at /unmai/graduation/dpo.
  • UCP Manual 2nd ed. (Nonviolent Peaceforce) — civilian-protection methodology applied to civic-infrastructure design.
  • UK Equality Act 2010 — protected-characteristic-aware editorial review on every desk page.

These five frameworks do not substitute for a university IRB — they substitute for the absence of one. If TLTE ever opens survivor intake, an independent review (mandatory under Graduation Gates 1–3) replaces this self-application.

5 · Conflicts of interest

The author currently holds no academic post, no consultancy with any state or intergovernmental body, no paid role with any Tamil political organisation, and no shareholding in any party that benefits from the work. Any future role that creates a conflict will be declared here within seven days, before any related publication.

6 · Power and language

The site renders Tamil first, English second. This is a positionality claim, not a translation choice. It is also a limit: Sinhala-language summaries of refusals are still a known gap (/research/language-coverage) and the reader should treat the absence as part of what the project has not yet earned.

7 · Reflexive failure conditions

If the author begins to speak in the voice of a sovereign Tamil people, accepts donations without amending this page, names a survivor or perpetrator, or opens intake before the Graduation Gates close — these are listed at /on-what-authority as failure conditions. Reflexivity is not a one-time disclosure; it is the public test the work is willing to fail.

Continue in Reference & Tools