CPA Comms Officer on 10 March, 2022

CPA Annual Report for 2020

Message from the Executive Director

The year 2020 was dominated by the Covid 19 pandemic, the efforts to manage it and the repercussions
thereof. In Sri Lanka, it was effectively the first year of the Gotabaya Rajapaksa presidency – won in
November 2019 with 6.9 million votes to be followed by the General Election in August 20202 which
returned a 2/3 majority of the seats in Parliament for the Rajapaksa regime.
Despite lockdown and self-isolation and other measures to combat the pandemic, CPA succeeded in the
main, in sticking to its work plans, successfully. Researchers worked from home and the administrative
and financial staff held the fort at office, when required.

Highlights of the year were the public interest litigation on the Presidential Pardon of Sgt Ratnayake,
convicted by all courts of the land for murder, including the slitting of the throat of a 5- year- old, the
regime’s insistence despite local and international expert opinion to the contrary, on the cremation of
those who had died of the virus – an act which struck at the heart of the religious practices of the Muslim
community in particular. There were a series of activities around the precise date of the election, the
inroads into parliamentary control over finances, policy briefs on the erosion of democratic governance
especially the appointment of Presidential Task Forces as the best representation of the alliance between
uniform and robe in government and governance, the photographic exhibition by youth of the Up-Country
Tamil community recording their lives and livelihoods and the monitoring of the 2020 General Election.
Of particular importance, given the serious ramifications of the Amendment, was CPA’s work on the
passage of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution, which did away with the checks and balances on the
exercise of executive power and authority ushered in limited form by the 19th Amendment. The 20th
Amendment, for one, does away with the impartiality and independence of key state institutions and
consolidates power and authority in the office of the Executive President. In this respect, it is both a
reversal and rejection of the norms of democratic governance and marks a clear shift away from a liberal
democratic dispensation. This is reinforced by the arguments for effective management of the pandemic,
and brings to the fore fears and concerns about creeping authoritarianism and the increased involvement
of the military in civilian affairs.

Despite the restrictions and lockdown, staff were able to fulfil our mandate with success. I wish to thank
them for their commitment. I hope and trust that it will extend beyond 2020 to 2021 our 25th anniversary and beyond.

Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
Executive Director

Read the Annual Report for 2020 in English here.

 

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 24 February, 2022

The Scope and the Content of The Constitution: Perspectives of Opinion Leaders

24th February 2022: The Scope and Content of the Sri Lankan Constitution: Perspectives of Opinion Leaders comprises a summary of findings that assesses the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of leaders from the four main ethnic communities (Sinhala, Tamil, Up Country Tamil and Muslim) across the island. These leaders included religious leaders, government officials, office holders of community-based organizations, teachers and school principals.

The assessment adapted and applied International IDEA’s constitutional performance assessment methodology to collect these leaders’ perceptions on the constitutional text and realities on current constitution, the Presidency, human rights and the nature of political and economic order. The Constitutional Performance Assessment was undertaken through a partnership between Social Indicator (SI); the survey and research arm of the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA), the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) and the Edinburgh Centre for Constitutional Law (ECCL).

Download the full report in English here

Download the full report in Sinhala here

Download the full report in Tamil here

 

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 11 February, 2022

In Re the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Bill (SC SD 13/2022)

On the 11th of February 2022, The Centre for Policy Alternative and its Executive Director, Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, filed a Petition in the Supreme Court (SC SD 13/2022) challenging the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Bill which was placed on the Order Paper of Parliament on 10th February 2022. The Bill seeks to make several amendments to the Prevention of Terrorism Act [PTA]. 

CPA has already published an initial commentary on the gazetted Bill pointing out that the Bill does not address the most fundamental problems with the PTA and explaining how the Bill falls short even in the limited areas it seeks to change. 

CPA has for decades raised concerns with the PTA and continues to advocate for its repeal. This draconian law has been severely abused, resulting in torture, prolonged detentions, and the deprivation of several other fundamental liberties. While this proposed amendment seeks to amend some provisions of the PTA, the Petitioners argue that the proposed changes are not sufficient to protect against the continued abuse. 

When the PTA was originally passed in 1979, then intended to be operative for only three years, it was referred to the Supreme Court as an ‘urgent Bill’, giving the Court only a few hours to reach a determination on its Constitutionality. Almost three years thereafter the PTA was amended, again as an urgent Bill, making the law a permanent and controversial part of Sri Lanka’s statute books for nearly 43 years. 

In its Petition, CPA and its Executive director argue that the effects of the amendments proposed in Clauses 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 11 and 12 of the Bill are unconstitutional, and such Clauses cannot be enacted into law, except if approved by People at a Referendum in addition to a two-thirds vote of the whole number of the Members of Parliament in favour as required by Article 83(a) of the Constitution. 

CPA notes that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in a Special Determination of a Bill is narrow in scope and only deals with the effect of the proposed amendments. Thus, there are matters in the original law, which cannot be rectified through this process. As such CPA urges the Government of Sri Lanka to withdraw this Bill, and take genuine steps to remedy the decades of abuse that have taken place under the PTA. The PTA must be repealed, and steps must be taken to ensure that all Fundamental Rights and other Constitutional protections are granted to everyone. 

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 10 February, 2022

Why the amendments to the Prevention of Terrorism Act are insufficient (A Visual Summary)

CPA’s commentary on the proposed amendments to the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act note the minimalist approach and basic reforms insufficient to address ground realities. Aspects which require urgent reform as highlighted by legal scholars, civil society actors and even the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka have also not been addressed in the Bill. The commentary further takes the view that the proposed amendment to the PTA appear to be more a token effort to address international pressure rather than a genuine and effective exercise to address ground realities and the abuses and violations brought about by the PTA.

(An Initial comment to the proposed amendments with further advocacy will follow after the tabling of the bill in Parliament.)

To read the full commentary, click here.

 

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 9 February, 2022

Confidence in Democratic Governance Index

The Confidence in Democratic Governance Index was conducted in light of assessing the system of governance under the Gotabaya Rajapaksa regime that was elected to power in November 2019.

Although the current regime promised vistas of prosperity and splendor, the soaring cost of living, food shortages and the crippling economy has left the citizenry in disarray. The mismanagement and imprudent social, economic and political policies executed amidst a public health crisis, has resulted in a system of governance that has created a near humanitarian catastrophe.

Multiple presidential task forces headed by military personnel (or those with a military mindset) that bypass existing channels of democratic processes, coupled with an emphasis on Sinhala majoritarian supremacy, has been a few of the key highlights in the current regime.

In this context, the national survey aimed to gather public perception pertaining to the government’s performance and pledges, preferred forms of governance, the role of the military, an assessment on social conditions, the legitimacy of COVID-19 regulations and fair treatment during the pandemic.

The research study was conducted by Social Indicator (SI) the survey research arm of the Centre for Policy Alternatives.

To read this report in English, click here.
To read an executive summary of this report in Sinhala, click here.
To read an executive summary of this report in Tamil, click here.

To view a series of infographics flagging some of the key findings in this report, click here.

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 31 January, 2022

Commentary on Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Bill 2022

31st January, 2022, Colombo, Sri Lanka: This commentary examines in brief, proposed amendments for the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act (PTA) which were approved by Cabinet on 24 January 2022 and subsequently gazetted. The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) has prepared this document as an initial comment to the proposed amendments with further advocacy to follow after the tabling of the bill in Parliament.

At the outset CPA notes that the proposed amendments follow a minimalist approach, introducing only basic reforms which are insufficient to address ground realities. Many of the aspects which require urgent reform as highlighted by legal scholars, civil society actors and even the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka have not been addressed in the Bill. In this light, the proposed amendment to the PTA appears to be more a token effort to address international pressure rather than a genuine and effective exercise to address ground realities and the abuses and violations brought about by the PTA. The present document raises several of these concerns with CPA reiterating its previous call for the repeal of the PTA. Further, while reiterating CPA’s earlier concerns and the need for new legislation upon the repeal of the PTA, CPA calls for an immediate moratorium on the use of PTA until an acceptable law can be drafted.

Several key concerns consistently raised by CPA and others and in the jurisprudence on the PTA have not been addressed in the amendments.

  • The amending Bill does not address problems with the admissibility of statements and confessions under the PTA. The provisions of the PTA waive the application of the Evidence Ordinance and there are no safeguards to be followed in recording confessions and statements from suspects. This has been particularly pointed out as a matter for concern by the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka in Maridas v The State.
  • The period of 72 hours after arrest and before production before a magistrate has not been amended. This is a loophole in the PTA which facilitates the torture of those arrested under the PTA while in custody.
  • The lack of judicial oversight during investigations has not been addressed by the amendments. The extensive powers granted to investigating officers including to take suspects from place to place, creates space for the continued violation of their rights as many reported being subjected to torture during such periods of being taken out of prison for interrogation.
  • The definition of the acts which fall within the offence of terrorism is of a broad and vague nature, and has allowed the PTA to be used even in instances where its use is not warranted. This has not been addressed by the amendments.
  • The access to an attorney-at-law is already provided for by law and the amending provision does not ensure the protection of the right to representation of the accused. Many PTA prisoners mention difficulties, particularly financial difficulties they face retaining legal counsel, as well as due to the nature of the cases, since there is stigma attached to appearing for a PTA accused. The amendments fail to address this issue.
  • There is no provision in the PTA for information to be provided at the time of arrest on the cause of arrest and the rights of the suspect. This is in violation of Article 13(1) of the Constitution and Sri Lanka’s international obligation under Article 9(2) of the ICCPR.
  • The PTA gives broad rule making powers to the minister and this has led to several instances where regulations which enable abuse and human rights violations have been made under these provisions. Most recently, the Prevention of Terrorism (De-radicalization from holding violent extremist religious ideology) Regulations No. 01 of 2021 which can further jeopardise the rights and liberties of persons, especially religious and ethnic minorities, and curtail political dissent with no effective due process guarantees has been promulgated under this provision. The amendment fails to address this.
  • Section 6 of the PTA gives extensive powers of search and seizure. The implementation of these powers should be carried out in a manner consistent with the inherent dignity of the person and international human rights law. The implementation of these measures relating to search and seizure should be professional and transparent and subject to oversight and judicial scrutiny. The amendment fails to address this.

The present document consists of two parts. Part I, will provide a brief initial comment on the impact of the proposed amendments to the PTA. CPA concludes that the proposed amendments are grossly inadequate and represent an absolute minimalist approach, introducing only basic reforms which are insufficient to address ground realities. In this light, the proposed amendment to the PTA appears to be more a token effort to address international pressure rather than a genuine and effective exercise to address ground realities and the abuses and violations brought about by the PTA.

Part II will give a brief overview of the historic criticism of the PTA, including pronouncements made by the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka questioning the constitutional legitimacy of the law.

To read this commentary in English, click here.
To read this commentary in Sinhala, click here.

To read this commentary in Tamil, click here.

 

 

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 28 January, 2022

Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu files Petition in the Supreme Court (SC SD 8/2022) against proposed Special Goods and Services Tax Bill

January 28th, 2022, Colombo, Sri Lanka: On the 27th of January 2022, the Executive Director of the Centre for Policy Alternatives, Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, filed a Petition in the Supreme Court (SC SD 08/2022) challenging the proposed Special Goods and Services Tax Bill, which was published in the Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka of 7th January 2022, and placed on the Order Paper of Parliament on 20th January 2022. The Bill seeks to provide for the introduction of a special goods and services tax which will operate in lieu of several other existing taxes, levies etc., and for the collection and administration of the same. 

It is argued that several clauses in the instant Bill are inconsistent with the Constitution, including several entrench provisions, and thus cannot be passed into law except if approved by the people at a referendum in addition to a two-thirds vote of the whole number of the Members of Parliament in favour as required by Article 83(a) of the Constitution. 

The Petition challenges clauses 2, 3 and 9(1) of the Bill. Clause 9(1) provides that the Special Goods and Services Tax, imposed under section 2, and payable by a taxable person shall be paid directly by the respective taxable person, by way of an electronic fund transfer to an account opened and maintained in the name of the Designated Officer for the purposes of this Act, and such payment shall be deemed to be a credit to the Consolidated Fund. 

This is a deviation from the usual process by which monies collected by way of taxes are ordinarily credited or remitted to the Consolidated fund. The Petition argues that this deviation could result in a dilution of the control Parliament has over Public Finance, which is important to ensure that public money is utilized in trust for the public. The Petition notes that a dilution of parliamentary oversight could result in corruption and a misuse of funds.