Public Opinion Poll on Sri Lanka’s Constitutional Reform

Throughout the past three decades, successive governments have stressed the importance of constitutional reform. This has been either as a means of addressing minority grievances which in turn would form part of a solution to the ethnic conflict or as a means of restructuring various contentious aspects within the 1978 Constitution (i.e. the executive presidential system and the electoral system.)

Although there had been many glitches and gaps in proceeding with the constitutional reform process since its initiation – the constitutional crisis that transpired in October 2018 further confirmed the lack of political will within the government to bring about proposed reforms and thereby brought the entire process to a complete halt. Ironically though, the many debates that followed the crisis inadvertently created a heightened level of awareness and interest about the constitution amongst the general public.

It is in this context Social Indicator, the survey research arm of the Centre for Policy Alternatives ventured into this study in order to capture public perception on the manner in which people perceive the contents of the constitution and their perception of the constitutional crisis that occurred in October 2018. Opinion surveys are a powerful medium through which the general public can voice their opinion on issues that matter to them. Furthermore it is also one of the best scientific methods that could help policy makers, academics and those in power understand the pulse of the citizenry. Therefore, we strongly believe that this survey will make an invaluable contribution towards understanding the citizens’ knowledge, perception and attitudes towards the constitution and constitutional reform process.

 

Download the report here.

 

Centre for Policy Alternatives v Attorney General (SC FR 199/2019)

The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) and its Executive Director, Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, filed papers challenging some of the Regulations included in the Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulation No. 1 of 2019.

It must be noted that this is not a challenge of the Declaration of a State of Emergency, but rather some of the Regulations which are found in Gazette Extraordinary No. 2120/5 dated Monday April 22, 2019.

While CPA agrees that certain emergency measures are needed to combat security threats that the country is currently facing, the position it takes is that such Regulations must be reasonable, and proportionate to the means that they seek to achieve, especially when they have the effect of curtailing the Fundamental Rights of the citizens of the country.

It is submitted that some of the Regulations in effect violate the right guaranteed under Articles 4(c) [judicial power of the peope], Article 10 [freedom of thought], Article 11 [ freedom from torture] ,Article 12(1)  [equal protection of the law]) & Article 12 (2)  [non-discrimination], Article 13 [ freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention and punishment] and 14 (1) (g) [freedom to engage in a lawful occupation, profession]  &14 (1)  (h) [ freedom  of movement and choosing residence within Sri Lanka] of the Constitution.

CPA Statement on the Presidential Pardon of Gnanasara Thero

24th May 2019, Colombo, Sri Lanka – The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) expresses its deep shock and concern over the Presidential pardon of Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero, who was released from prison on 23rd May 2019. The pardon raises a number of pressing questions which the President and the government are obliged to answer.

Gnanasara Thero was convicted of four contempt of court charges by the Court of Appeal on 8th August 2018 and sentenced to 19 years of rigorous imprisonment to be completed within 6 years. The conviction and sentencing was premised on the Thero’s behaviour within court premises which was judged to have been beyond the respectful behaviour expected of ordinary citizens before the courts.

CPA stresses that presidential pardons exist to correct miscarriages of justice and are to be exercised with extreme caution and gravity. The pardon of Gnanasara Thero cannot be called a fit and proper exercise of that power by any metric. The trial, conviction and sentencing of the Thero raised no legitimate questions of any miscarriage of justice and there was ample opportunity for the Thero to fully exercise his right to a fair trial by appealing his conviction. Indeed this option was pursued by him at both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court which both duly dismissed the appeals. As such, the pardon itself amounts to an undue interference with the legal process.

The pardon raises a number of very serious concerns. First, it legitimises the view that it is possible to act with contempt for the judiciary, be punished through a legitimate judicial process, and then enjoy impunity through a pardon granted on political considerations. The pardon specifically signals that some categories of citizens, such as the Buddhist clergy, can expect to enjoy preferential treatment when it comes to obeying the law. It also sets a dangerous precedent whereby properly tried, convicted and sentenced persons can be released on the whims of the President and government.

Second, the pardon comes amidst the ongoing and extremely tense situation in the country. It has been a mere week since extremist Sinhala Buddhist mobs instigated anti-Muslim riots across North Western Sri Lanka, resulting in the death of one Muslim man and the damage to a large number of Muslim residences, businesses and places of worship. Gnanasara Thero has played a documented role in the past as Secretary of the Bodu Bala Sena in expressing hate speech and inciting violence towards minority communities, particularly Muslim Sri Lankans. The pardon, however indirectly, represents a worrying endorsement of such anti-minority sentiment, and can only heighten the anxiety and fear being felt by Muslim Sri Lankans today.

The responsibility for interfering with the rule of law and endorsing anti-minority sentiment in this manner lies not only with the President but the wider government as well. The Minister of Buddha Sasana Gamini Jayawickrama earlier endorsed requests by religious and political third parties to issue the pardon, and numerous members of the government have spoken out and acted in support of it. Accordingly, the government as a whole must justify, with stated reasons, why the grant of a pardon in this case will not be inconsistent with the Constitution, the rule of law, and the administration of justice in Sri Lanka and will not exacerbate inter-communal tensions. Anything less will directly undermine the legitimacy of Sri Lanka’s democracy.

 

Download this statement in English, Sinhala and Tamil.

 

CPA Press Statement on Incidents of Communal Violence in May 2019

The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) is alarmed by the increased spate of communal violence against the Muslim community since the Easter Sunday attacks of 21 April 2019. Recent and ongoing incidents in Negombo, Chilaw, Kurunagala, Kuliyapitiya, Hettipola, Dummalasuriya, Rasnayakapura, Kobeigane, Bingiriya among others indicate that Muslim homes, businesses and places of worship are being targeted by violent individuals and groups, with incidents reported also during curfew hours. This violence is encouraged by the viral circulation of video clips and posts inciting violence against the Muslim community.

CPA is also concerned about reports indicating inaction and/or delays in response to this violence by the security authorities, an unfortunate trend which has repeatedly been witnessed in the past. CPA urges the authorities to take immediate proactive action to bring the security situation under control and to prevent the violence from spreading.

Steps also need to be urgently taken to ensure authorities respond in a timely and effective manner to the incidents within the existing legal framework. Inaction and/or unwillingness to prosecute any person for inciting racial and religious hatred have exacerbated a culture of impunity and must not be taken lightly. An inability or unwillingness to prevent the spread of violence must also be followed by the resignation of those responsible or steps taken to remove such officials as provided by the law. CPA is also troubled by reports of political interference in criminal justice processes which must be swiftly dealt with by the authorities without any fear or favour. Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious country where all citizens are equal before the law. Our political and religious leaders must ensure we respect our diversity and ensure that all steps are taken to prevent the spread of violence, address apprehension within communities and promote peace and coexistence.

Download statement in Sinhala here.

 

Understanding Emergency: Easter Sunday Attacks 2019

The Easter Sunday attacks in Sri Lanka were the worst incidence of terrorism since the end of the war a decade ago. Four days after the main events, the aftershocks of the attack have still not subsided and the country has not returned to normalcy. In order to deal with the situation, the President proclaimed a state of emergency and promulgated a set of emergency regulations on 23 and 24 April. The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) fully appreciates the need for a robust and compelling response from the government in the face of terrorism, so as to reassure and restore public confidence in institutions and a swift return to political, economic, and social normalcy.

At moments like these, however, there is a danger of executive overreach, as demonstrated by our own past experience of protracted conflict, and that of other countries facing the threat of terrorism. While constitutional democracies accommodate the need for expanded executive powers in order to cope with emergencies, and accordingly the need for some regulated abridgement of individual liberties and normal checks and balances, it is critical to ensure that emergency powers are not allowed to completely extinguish the balance between freedom and security.

In particular, in equipping the state with adequate powers to respond to the threat of terrorism, we emphasise that the following points require serious attention if this is to be done consistently with the democratic values underpinning our Constitution:

  • That no ethnic or religious minority is alienated and marginalised through indiscriminate association with any terror groups in conflict with the state, and ensuring proactive measures to maintain communal harmony and safety;
  • That the exercise of emergency powers does not exceed the limits of the law and the Constitution, which limits have been expanded by the declaration of a state of emergency;
  • That emergency powers lawfully exercised have the effect of restricting fundamental rights only to the extent permitted by the Constitution and strictly necessary in a democratic society;
  • That administrative safeguards are in place to prevent or minimise arbitrary, unreasonable, or disproportionate practices, and in particular safeguards against the use of torture or other inhumane treatment;
  • That attempts are not made to evade necessary judicial and parliamentary oversight over the exercise of emergency powers; and
  • That all emergency measures are consistent with Sri Lanka’s obligations under international law, and in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Judged against these constitutional standards, the emergency regulations passed yesterday give cause for concern. In the scope of offences and penalties, the extraordinary powers adversely affecting personal liberty and property, the potential for the imposition of undue and illegitimate restrictions on the freedoms of expression and assembly, and in the absence of effective oversight mechanisms, the regulations can be seen as pushing the boundaries of what is constitutionally permissible. We earnestly hope therefore that these powers are exercised with prudence and restraint, and that the current state of emergency is terminated as soon as exigencies permit.

Download a more detailed description of the contents of the current emergency regulations as well as the general legal framework governing states of emergency.

Download a full set of infographics in a high-quality PDF.

Download this document in Tamil here.

Download this document in Sinhala here.

CPA strongly condemns the violence in churches and hotels across Sri Lanka

21st April 2019, Colombo, Sri Lanka: The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) vehemently condemns today’s attacks on three churches, three hotels and other locations across Sri Lanka that resulted in over 200 deaths and left over 450 injured. This shocking and senseless attack is the largest witnessed in post-war Sri Lanka. CPA extends its deep condolences to the families and loved ones of all victims of these attacks and urges the authorities to take immediate action to prevent such violence from spreading. Furthermore, we call upon those in authority to take speedy and decisive steps to hold all perpetrators to account without fear or favour.

CPA has continuously condemned the impunity that has prevailed following attacks on places of religious worship and affronts to the freedom of religion, which have been increasing in number in recent years. The most recent of these was a mere week ago, with the attack on the Methodist Prayer Centre in ​​Kundichchaankulama, Anuradhapura, on the 14th of April 2019. CPA calls on the government to ensure that this impunity does not continue following today’s attacks, and emphasises the need to protect the rights and safety of all religious minorities in the island.

The attack on hotels is clearly a horrific and premeditated attack on tourism in particular and the economy in general. Moreover it goes to the heart of the ability of the government to provide security to the people.  We call upon the government to demonstrate its ability to do so and upon our fellow citizens to assist the government in this.

Today’s incidents demonstrate the urgent need to move from the rhetoric of reforms and reconciliation to real action. We must desist from actions that lead to communal divisions, fear and hate. And we must ask for nothing less from our political and religious leaders, especially in this election year.

Download the statement in EnglishSinhala and Tamil.

Proposed Counter Terrorism Act: Questions and Answers

The proposed Counter-Terrorism Act (CTA) was approved by Cabinet on 11 September 2018 and tabled in Parliament on 9 October 2018. This short document prepared by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) attempts to address frequently asked questions on the CTA and compliments previous documents on the same issue.

Initial statement made by CPA on the bill can be found here

CPA filed papers on the 17th of October 2018 intervening in one of the petitions challenging the proposed Counter Terrorism Bill.

CPA report comparing the Proposed Counter Terrorism Bill to the Prevention of Terrorism Act can be found here.

Download the Q&A in English here and Tamil here, and Sinhala here.