Centre for Policy Alternatives on 8 April, 2020

Structures to Deal with COVID-19 in Sri Lanka: A Brief Comment on the Presidential Task Force

8 April 2020, Colombo, Sri Lanka: In response to the COVID-19 health emergency, Sri Lanka has witnessed the activation of existing structures and the establishment of new ones. One such new entity is the Presidential Task Force established to direct, coordinate and monitor the delivery of continuous services and for the sustenance of overall community life (‘the Task Force’). At the time of its creation, the President had already established the National Operation Centre for Prevention of COVID-19 Outbreak. However, the mandate and powers assigned to the Task Force are much wider in scope and range from ensuring the supply of essential goods and services to providing relief measures to vulnerable groups of society.

This guide prepared by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) briefly examines the framework of the Task Force. While efficient and effective action to minimise the impact of the pandemic is urgently needed, the guide points to a number of existing legal and institutional frameworks under which such action could have been taken. The Sri Lanka Disaster Management Act No.13 of 2005, in particular, provides for instances such as this and allows extensive action to be taken efficiently employing existing institutions and actors. There are additional, alternative laws under which the individual tasks assigned to the Task Force could have been carried out.

The guide also points out the vagueness of the definition of the tasks of the Task Force and whether its expansive mandate is ultra vires Article 33 of the Constitution and a number of individual written laws. This is compounded by the lack of transparency and accountability generated by these ad hoc measures. Thus, attention must be paid to querying the true intentions of establishing the Task Force.

CPA notes that in the face of the unprecedented scale and magnitude of the emergency, the response must also be one that is efficient, coordinated and in adherence to principles of conflict sensitivity, equity, transparency and accountability. As the guide highlights, Sri Lanka has a wealth of expertise and skills within the civil administration that can and must inform the present response. Most fundamentally, responses must be in conformity with Sri Lanka’s constitutional and legal framework.

Download the guide as a PDF here.

 

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 5 April, 2020

Disposal of bodies of deceased persons who were infected with and suspected of being infected with COVID-19

4th April 2020

H.E. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, President of the Democratic, Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka
CC:
Hon. Pavithra Waniarachchi, Minister of Health
Dr. Anil Jasinghe, Director General Health Services
Dr. Sudath Samaraweera, Chief Epidemiologist, Epidemiology Unit
Dr. Hasitha Attanayake, Director, Infectious Diseases Hospital
Dr. Ajith Tennakoon, Chief Judicial Medical Officer
Dr. Deepika Udagama, Chairperson, Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka
Dr. Razia Pendse, WHO Representative to Sri Lanka.

Your Excellency,

Disposal of bodies of deceased persons who were infected with and suspected of being infected with COVID-19

We write to you as the person leading Sri Lanka’s effort to prevent and deal with COVID-19.

We, at the outset, would like to express our gratitude to the public officials in Sri Lanka for their contribution towards preventing and dealing with COVID-19, particularly the untiring and selfless service of health sector workers.

We write with regard to the disposal of bodies of persons who died due to being infected with, and those that died who are suspected of being infected with COVID-19. We were pleased that the Ministry of Health Provisional Clinical Practice Guidelines on COVID 19 Suspected and Confirmed Patients dated 27 March 2020 allowed for burial under certain conditions, and the family of the deceased to view the body at a designated place at the hospital. We were however concerned to learn that an individual of the Muslim faith who died due to COVID-19 was cremated on 30 March 2020 in contravention of the said Ministry of Health Guidelines and against the wishes of the family.

We note that the Ministry of Health Provisional Clinical Practice Guidelines on COVID 19 Suspected and Confirmed Patients were thereafter amended and the new document dated 31 March 2020 as well as the Ministry of Health (MOH) Circular no EPID/400/2019 n-cov issued on 1 April 2020, which reproduces the amended Guidelines, require that all COVID-19 victims be cremated. We also note contradictory media reports on 2 April 2020 that Cabinet Spokesperson Bandula Gunawardena has stated that the government will adhere to WHO Guidelines in disposing the bodies of those who have died as a result of COVID- 19, as well as the appointment of an expert committee to decide on appropriate and practices to deal with the bodies of those who die due to COVOD-19.

When we face such a grave public health crisis there is a need to ensure that the mental health of our population is also given due attention. In this regard, the disposal of bodies of persons who died during the pandemic requires particular attention. In the Muslim faith it is required that the dead be buried and cremation is not permitted. The possibility of compulsory cremation therefore is a matter of great distress to practicing Muslims. In these times of distress and uncertainty this is an added stressor that may adversely impact the mental health of large numbers in the population.

At present, the religious identity of certain victims has been highlighted due to which, in both mainstream and social media, we have seen outpourings of vitriol, and hate speech against Muslims for their actions or inactions in not preventing or causing the spread of COVID-19. In this context, it is important that the decisions made regarding burial are not perceived as punitive measures against such perceived irresponsibility by infected persons. We must also recognize that there is widespread anti Muslim sentiment prevailing in Sri Lanka and has been for the past several years. The negative stereotypes about Muslims were exacerbated by the terror attacks on Easter Sunday in 2019 carried out by an ISIS inspired group of Muslims. It is important to ensure that decisions regarding matters of public health do not result in the persecution or marginalization of the Muslim population. Within such a context, we note with concern that the revised MOH Guidelines dated 31 March 2020 and the aforementioned MOH Circular disregard Muslim religious sensibilities and requirements, and provide no succor to the already distressed.

In this regard, we urge you to consider the WHO Interim Guidance dated 24 March 2020 on Infection Prevention and Control for the Safe Management of a Dead Body in the Context of COVID-19. The Guidance states that ‘cadavers do not transmit disease’ and that ‘It is a common myth that persons who have died of a communicable disease should be cremated, but this is not true. Cremation is a matter of cultural choice and available resources’. The Guidance further advises the authorities to ‘manage each situation on a case-by-case basis, balancing the rights of the family, the need to investigate the cause of death, and the risks of exposure to infection’. Where disposal is concerned, the Guidance says that ‘People who have died from COVID-19 can be buried or cremated’. We recognize that the option of burial might not be available in certain instances due to legitimate public health requirements such as the depth of graves. To address these concerns, the state could identify suitable burial grounds that meet WHO standards in all districts and request the particular community religious authorities to prepare themselves to adhere to those standards.

In seeking to ensure the well-being of all Sri Lankans at this difficult time, we highlight the need to also ensure dignity in death. In addition to the issue of Muslim and perhaps Christian burials, we have witnessed that the media is permitted to cover the cremation of those who died from COVID-19 without any consideration of the wishes of the bereaved families. While preserving the health of our population must be paramount, it must not be at the cost of our common humanity and the dignity of our dead. WHO guidelines state that, ‘The dignity of the dead, their cultural and religious traditions, and their families should be respected and protected throughout’.

Moreover, to encourage persons to report possible exposure and seek medical advice and help, we highlight the need to not stigmatize patients or criminalize them in any way, which will only lead to persons hiding their symptoms and further infecting others. It is also important to ensure there is public information in all three languages regarding the behavior required under different circumstances as well as regarding the available medical care. The availability of such information will reassure the general population that being infected with COVID-19 is not a death sentence.

We therefore urge you to reconsider the MOH Circular of 1st April 2020 and amendments dated 31 March 2020 to the MOH Provisional Clinical Practice Guidelines, and instead follow WHO Guidance on the disposal of bodies. We also call upon your Excellency to address the country’s greatly distressed Muslims and put to rest their fears that they are somehow being punished, or that the country has little respect for their concerns.

THE LIST OF SIGNATORIES

1. Dr. Asha Abeysekere
2. Hilmy Ahamed
3. Silma Ahamed
4. Azhar Ahamed
5. Nihal Ahamed
6. Prof. Arjuna Aluwihare
7. K. Aingkaran, Attorney-at-law
8. Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, Open University Of Sri Lanka
9. S.M. Aneefa
10. N. Abdul
11. Faaiz, Ameer , Attorney-at-law
12. Prof. Ameer Ali
13. Swathika Arulingam, Attorney at law
14. Niranjala Arulanathy
15. Subajini Kisho Anton, Attorney at law
16. M.M. Baheej, Attorney-at-law
17. Capt. A.G.A. Barrie, SLE, P.Eng.
18. Jiffriya Barrie
19. Faahima Cadar
20. Angelica Chandrasekeran
21. Anushya Coomaraswamy
22. Radhika Coomaraswamy
23. C. Colombage
24. Danesh Cassie Chetty
25. Shalomi Daniel
26. Amalini De Sayrah
27. Bishop Duleep de Chickera
28. Geetha de Chickera
29. Marisa De Silva
30. Shaanea Mendis de Silva, Artist
31. Dinesh Dogangoda, Attorney-at-law
32. Prabu Deepan
33. K.M.Deen, All Ceylon YMMA Conference
34. Dinushika Dissanayake
35. Asma Edris
36. S.C.C. Elankovan
37. Sarala Emmauel
38. Rev. Sister Nicola Emmanuel.
39. Mohamed Faslan, University of Colombo
40. Rashika Fazali
41. Ilma Fareez
42. Latheef Farook, Journalist
43. Rizvi Farouk
44. Khalid Farouk
45. Ian Ferdinands
46. Dr. Kaushalya Fernando
47. Dr. Nimalka Fernando, Attorney-at-law
48. Ruki Fernando
49. Tamara Fernando
50. Rev. Reid Shelton Fernando, Retired Priest, Colombo
51. Angela Forman
52. Bhavani Fonseka
53. Manel Fonseka
54. Mushtaq Fuad
55. Aneesa Firthous
56. C. Ranitha Gnanarajah Attorney -at law
57. Shyamala Gomez
58. Dr. Mario Gomez
59. Gehan Gunetilleke
60. Prof. Camena Guneratna
61. Harsha Gunasena
62. Anberiya Hanifa, Muslim Women’s Research and Action Forum
63. Dr. Farzana Haniffa, University Of Colombo
64. Sa’diya Hassen
65. Adel Hashim
66. Prof. Rajan Hoole
67. Prof. S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole
68. Prof. Qadri Ismail
69. Zumaiya Ifthikar
70. Fathima Nabeela Iqbal
71. Ashraff Jainudeen
72. U.L. Jaufer, Attorney-at-law
73. Dr. Sivagnanam Jeyasankar
74. Sr. Victorine James, Holy Cross School of health Sciences Jaffna
75. Dr. Ahilan Kadirgamar, University Of Jaffna
76. Niyanthini Kadirgamar
77. Sakuntala Kadirgamar
78. Dr. Ramya Kumar
79. Chulani Kodikara
80. Mohamed Kubais
81. Mahaluxmy Kurushanthan
82. Annie Kurian
83. Jayanthi Kuru-Utumpala
84. Shaheera Lafeer
85. Jeremy Liyanage, Bridging Lanka Ltd.
86. Ismath Majeed.
87. Jensila Majeed
88. Justice. Dr. Saleem Marsoof
89. Izath Manal
90. Mohamed Mahuruf
91. M. Meera Saibu
92. Dr. Farah Mihlar
93. Juwairia Mohideen
94. Buhari Mohamed
95. Nawaz Mohamed, Former Working Director, SLRC
96. F. Muflik
97. F. Z. Nasrullah
98. Nagulan Nesiah
99. Devanesan Nesiah, Retired Secretary, Ministry of Transport, Environment and Women’s Affairs
100. Prof. Vasuki Nesiah, New York University
101. S.M.A. Niyas
102. M.N.M. Nowras
103. Prof. Arjuna Parakrama, University Of Peradeniya
104. Nicola Perera, University Of Colombo.
105. Dylan Perera
106. Anna Peter
107. Dr. Jehan Perera, National Peace Council
108. Srinath Perera, Attorney-at-aw, United Socialist Party
109. Rev. Dr. Jayasiri Peiris, Church of Ceylon
110. Fathima Rameeza
111. Nalini Ratnaraja
112. K.S. Ratnavel, Attorney-at-law
113. Dr. Ramola Rasool, University Of Kelaniya
114. Prof. Harshana Rambukwella, Open University Of Sri Lanka
115. A.R.A. Ramees
116. Y.R. Ranjan
117. Sheila Richards
118. Ahamed Rislan
119. Yasmin Raji
120. R. Rasmin
121. Peter Rezel – Chartered Accountant
122. Amna Rifky
123. Thyagi Ruwanpathirana
124. Afrah Sidiqi
125. Vanie Simon
126. Prof. Sivamohan Sumathy, University Of Peradeniya
127. Prof. Gameela Samarasinghe, University Of Colombo.
128. Sampath Samarakoon
129. Rev. Selvanathan Selvan
130. M.N Shamla
131. Shaheed Sangani
132. Ambika Satkunanathan
133. S.Sivathasan
134. Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
135. Dr. Seyed Sheriffdeen
136. Sharmila Seyyid, Social Worker
137. Revd. S .D .P. Selvan
138. N.M. Saroor
139. Joanne Senn
140. Shreen Abdul Saroor
141. Krishanthi Tharmaraj
142. Mahendran Thiruvarangan, Lecturer (Probationary), University of Jaffna
143. Dr. Minna Thaheer, Senior Researcher, Centre for Poverty Analysis
144. Azkha Thariqshad
145. Fathima Nusra Thameem
146. Mathuri Thamilmaran – Attorney at Law
147. Visakha Tillekeratne, Chief Commissioner, Sri Lanka Girl Guides Association
148. Hafsa Uvais.
149. Mass Usuf, Attorney-at-law
150. S. Vinothan
151. Kamala Vasuki
152. Emil van der Poorten
153. Stella Victor
154. Piyumi Wattuhewa
155. Shamara Wettimuny
156. Lal Wijenayake, Attorney-at-law
157. M. Wahid
158. Varuni Weerasinghe
159. Annouchka Wijesinghe
160. Upul Kumara Wickramasinghe – Durham University
161. Riza Yahiya, Architect
162. Deshamanya Godfrey Yogarajah
163. Fr. V. Yogeswaran
164. S.A.C.M. Zuhyle

Organisations:

1. Sisterhood Initiatives
2. National Peace Council
3. Northern Muslim Civil Society
4. INFORM Human Rights Documentation Centre
5. Rural Development Foundation
6. International Institute for Research, Information and Action (IIRIA)
7. Mannar Women’s Development Center
8. Women’s Action Network
9. Muslim Women Development Trust
10. International Centre for Ethnic Studies (ICES)
11. Centre for Policy Alternative
12. Human Elevation Organization
13. Islamic Women’s Association for Research and Empowerment
14. Centre for Justice and Change, Trincomalee
15. Centre for Human Rights and Development
16. Eastern Social Development Foundation
17. Law and Human Rights Center, Jaffna.

Download as a PDF here.

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 3 April, 2020

CPA Statement on the Election Commission’s Request for a Special Reference by the President to the Supreme Court on the Law Relating to Parliamentary Elections

3rd April 2020, Colombo, Sri Lanka: The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) notes several news reports on the Election Commission’s concerns that it will be unable to hold parliamentary elections within the time-period stipulated by law due to the Covid-19 crisis. The Commission has accordingly requested the President to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court to clarify the law in relation to the next steps in these circumstances.

CPA has already raised concerns regarding the absence of a functioning Parliament and highlighted the implications of this on public finance and oversight over the Government’s response to the Covid–19 pandemic. The course of action most consistent with the Constitution is to summon the dissolved Parliament, which can continue until the end of August 2020. CPA notes that this is also the course of action that would be most in line with protecting public health and the citizens’ right to franchise. We are therefore of the opinion that this can be done without the need for a Special Reference by the President to the Supreme Court.

If in the event H.E. the President makes a special reference to the Supreme Court in terms of Article 129 of the Constitution, CPA calls on the President to allow the Court adequate time to consider the complicated issues concerned. The prevailing restrictions on movement which should neither prevent a hearing for all stakeholders nor hinder the Court’s deliberations. Considering the public importance of the issue, CPA further calls on the President to request the Supreme Court to make its opinion public, or undertake to make the opinion public himself.

Further, CPA calls on the Hon. Chief Justice and the other Judges of the Supreme Court to use their discretion in terms of Article 129 to ensure that the proceedings of Court are open to all parties interested to make submissions to Court. In a context where the Supreme Court’s sittings have been suspended until 27th April 2020, this would require the Court to actively inform citizens of any pending proceedings.

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 31 March, 2020

The Pardon in the Mirusuvil Massacre: Sri Lanka’s Elusive Quest for Justice

On 26th March 2020, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa pardoned former Army Staff Sergeant R. M. Sunil Rathnayake, a convicted death row prisoner. The pardon was met with mixed reactions in Sri Lanka. At one end of the spectrum was concern and condemnation for pardoning a convicted criminal while others welcomed the pardon and for releasing a former military person. Notable is the timing of the pardon. The pardon was granted when Sri Lanka is facing an unprecedented public health emergency with Covid-19 and with focus primarily on dealing with the response and related issues. This is also in a context when civil society has called for urgent prison reforms and the Government has set up a committee to examine how to address the overcrowding and other concerns in the prisons in Sri Lanka, creating the expectation that cases involving inmates for lesser crimes or unable to pay bail will be given due attention. It was in this midst, when attempts are seemingly made to address prison reforms, that President Rajapaksa chose to keep to his earlier pledge and pardon a convicted criminal.

Download the brief in full here.

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 30 March, 2020

Mirusuvil Massacre – Accused Pardoned; No Reparations for Victims’ Families

On March 26, 2020, President Gotabhaya Rajapaksa granted a presidential pardon and released convicted death row prisoner and mass murderer, former Army Staff Sergeant R. M. Sunil Rathnayake.  While the country is on lockdown due to COVID-19, the President has seized this opportunity to deal a lethal blow to the rule of law to show that military perpetrators of heinous crimes will be given cover at the highest level despite the rulings of the Supreme Court the highest court in our land. In pardoning Ratnayake, the President has given his blessing to a cold-blooded killer who murdered a five-year-old child and seven other innocent civilians.

The story of the civilian murders in Mirusuvil goes back to twenty years – on December 19 2000, nine Tamils civilians – including three teenagers and a five-year old child – travelled from Udipiddy to Mirusuvil, a village 16 miles from Jaffna town, in the Northern Province of Sri Lanka. These persons were among those displaced from Mirusuvil due to the civil war who were resettled in a camp at Udupitty. Displaced family members used to obtain permission from the Sri Lankan Army to visit their homes. But on this day, those who visited their village never returned. It soon emerged that eight of the nine were killed by the Sri Lankan Army. 

On December 24, 2000, one of the missing, recounted the incident and gave details about the whereabouts of the remaining eight. On his evidence when the police and the Magistrate went to the site there were no bodies except a skeleton of the animal in the toilet pit. After that when the Military – Police arrested the persons who were on duty in  the area, Sergeant R.M. Sunil Rathnayake  gave a statement to the Military Police stating that  the bodies were removed from the toilet pit and buried somewhere else. Thereafter the Police and the Magistrate went to the site of the burial and exhumed the bodies. Four men and four children were found with throats slit and eyes blindfolded.  Some corpses had their hands and legs chopped off. 

The deceased belonged to four families.  A single family lost four members, including children aged 13 and 5.  Another lost two breadwinners.  Two more also lost primary breadwinners. 

Justice took more than a decade to wind its way but, against all odds, judgment was delivered at last. On June 24, 2015, former Army Sergeant R. M. Sunil Rathnayake who had been enlarged on bail pending trial  was found guilty of murdering the eight civilians and was sentenced to death by the Trial at Bar consisting of three High Court Judges held in Colombo. On appeal against the said judgment a five – Judge bench of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka unanimously affirmed the conviction and sentence on April 25, 2019.

By granting the presidential pardon to Sergeant R.M. Sunil Rathnayake, power has been abused and justice has been forsaken.  In a country where military perpetrators have rarely been held to account, leading ethnic distrust to fester into war, the President has granted a pardon to one of few men actually held accountable by our nation’s highest court. His pardon is a direct challenge to judicial independence and will result in the further erosion and loss of confidence in the Sri Lankan justice system among war-affected communities. 

For the four families directly affected, who have suffered from poverty and immeasurable personal loss, their small sliver of solace has been snatched away.  When the sole surviving witness was previously visited by state intelligence officers soon after the presidential election, he expressed his apprehension that, he has no security or protection if the accused is released.  Now that threat is real, and our laws and structures are hardly equipped to protect him.

It is a matter of regret and national tragedy that neither the state nor government authorities have over the years offered reparations or compensations to the families of the dead who have been deprived of their bread winners and are condemned to live in poverty for the rest of their lives.

Soon after the Presidential election, news media speculated that the Mirusuvil murderer was to be granted a presidential pardon and released. Affected families were terribly upset and lodged complaints before the Human Rights Commission in Jaffna and in the media. Right now, with the country in lock down, victims’ families are in no position to demonstrate their disapproval and distress.  While pretending to save the country from COVID-19, the President is actually using his constitutional powers to fulfill his inflammatory electoral pledge to release “war heroes” from prison.

To put it in context, the country withdrew from its UNHRC commitments last month. The President declared that there are no disappeared persons, and those believed missing are all dead. His government has promoted suspected war criminals as head of operations in military sectors, and General Shavendra Silva is touted as a savior against COVID 19. The military is increasingly involved in all civilian activities. New roadblocks and checkpoints have been introduced solely in the Northern Province.  And now a convicted mass murderer is pardoned and released by the President.

In perspective, the act of granting presidential pardon to a convicted criminal conveys the chilling message to the public that, irrespective of the gravity of the offence, offenders from the security forces will not be punished even if convicted by Court of Law and that any crime or violence committed against the ethnic communities will go unpunished. The security forces including the police already enjoying high degree of impunity will surely be further emboldened   by the covert encouragement by the government to commit further atrocities against the hapless and vulnerable people. As organizations and individuals who are committed to the Rule of Law and to the protection of democratic values, we vehemently and unreservedly condemn the presidential pardon granted to Sergeant R.M. Sunil Rathnayake which said act will undoubtedly lead to further militarization of the society and contribute to disunity and distrust among communities in the country.

Endorsed by:

  1. Centre for human Rights and Development (CHRD)
  2. Women’s Action Network (WAN)
  3. International Centre for Ethnic Studies (ICES)
  4. Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA)
  5. Human Rights Office – Kandy
  6. Human Elevation Organization (HEO)- Ampara
  7. Law and Society Trust (LST)
  8. Eastern Social Development Foundation (ESDF)
  9. Mannar Women’s Development Federation (MWDF)
  10. National Fisheries Solidarity Movement (NAFSO)
  11. Affected Women’s Forum (AWF)- Ampara
  12. Rural Development Foundation (RDF)
  13. Institute of Social Development (ISD)- Kandy
  14. Committee for the Protection of the Rights of Prisoners (CPRP)
  15. INFORM Human Rights Documentation Centre
  16. Federation of Media Employees’ Trade Unions
  17. Centre for Justice and Change, Trincomalee
  18. Rights Now – Collective for Democracy
  19. Right to Life Human Rights Centre
  20. Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association
  21. Movement for Land and Agriculture Reform (MONLAR)
  22. Families of the Disappeared  

Click here to download the statement in English, Sinhala, and Tamil.

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 30 March, 2020

Letter on Prison Reforms in the wake of COVID19

26 March 2020

To:
H.E. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka
Hon. Jayantha Jayasuriya, Chairman of the Judicial Services Commission, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
Hon. Nimal Siripala De Silva, Minister of Justice
Mr. T. M. J. W. Thennakoon, Commissioner General of Prisons
Mr. Kalinga Indatissa PC, President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka

Copy to:
Hon. Justice B.P. Aluvihare, Judicial Services Commission, Justice of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
Hon. Justice K. Sisira J. De Abrew, Judicial Services Commission, Justice of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
Mr. H. S. Somaratne, Secretary of the Judicial Services Commission
Dr Deepika Udagama, Chairperson, Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka
Hon. Pavithra Wanniarachchi, Minister of Health, Nutrition and Indigenous Medicine
Mr. Dappula de Livera, Attorney General of Sri Lanka
National Police Commission of Sri Lanka

Re: Releasing Prisoners to prevent spread of COVID-19 in prisons

We welcome the announcement of the formation of a committee to discuss the release of prisoners and de-congest prisons, which is crucial to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in prisons.

Given the severe overcrowding of prisons with minimal sanitation and health facilities, they could be very vulnerable to the spread of COVID-19. They are also places where inmates are unable to practice preventive measures recommended by health experts, such as social distancing and hand washing with soap, as water and soap are not freely available to prisoners. Further, it is not possible to lockdown prisons due to the staff leaving and returning to prison. De-congestion and other measures are also important to calm the fears of prisoners and prison staff about COVID-19 infections. Such fears have led to unrests in several prisons, leading to deaths and injuries reportedly due to shooting in the Anuradhapura Remand Prison. There have also been COVID-19 related unrests and deaths in prisons in other countries, such as India, Colombia and Italy, which point to the potential for prisons to become hotbeds not only for the infection to spread but also for unrest and violence.

 

Click here to access the full letter: English | Sinhala | Tamil

 

Centre for Policy Alternatives on 28 March, 2020

Brief Guide I: Evolving Legal Issues in the Context of COVID-19

The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) has prepared this brief guide to raise several legal issues and highlight consequences in the context of Covid-19 in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka has taken swift action in recent weeks to contain Covid-19 outbreak. These actions have been taken in the backdrop of Parliament being dissolved by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa on 2nd March 2020.  Whilst CPA acknowledges the work done by those in the frontlines in containing the spread of the virus, increasing concerns are raised of emerging governance and rights issues in the response to the present health emergency. This brief guide aims to constructively engage with the authorities to ensure the Government is able to deal with Covid-19 pandemic efficiently, lawfully and constitutionally. In the effort to tackle the virus, CPA underlines the importance of upholding of the rule of law and adherence to constitutional governance in Sri Lanka.

Access the full guide here. Download in Sinhala here. Download in Tamil here.