Sri Lanka's valuable GSP+ trade preferences with the European Union could be under serious threat, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa has warned, as the government moves forward with what critics are calling a repressive and deeply controversial counter-terrorism law. Premadasa issued a special statement charging President Anura Kumara Dissanayake's administration with attempting to introduce harsh legislation that he believes is designed to silence public dissent rather than genuinely address security concerns. The warning has sent ripples through Sri Lanka's political and business communities, raising urgent questions about the country's economic future and its standing with key international partners.
What Is GSP+ and Why Does It Matter to Sri Lanka?
The Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus, commonly known as GSP+, is a special trade arrangement offered by the European Union that allows developing countries to export thousands of products to EU member states at significantly reduced or zero tariff rates. For Sri Lanka, this arrangement is critically important. The country's garment and textile industry, which employs hundreds of thousands of workers — the majority of them women — relies heavily on preferential access to European markets to remain competitive on the global stage.
Sri Lanka previously lost its GSP+ status in 2010 following concerns raised by the European Union over human rights violations and failures to implement key international conventions. The economic consequences were severe, with export revenues declining sharply and thousands of jobs placed at risk. The country worked for years to regain those benefits, finally having its GSP+ status restored in 2017 after demonstrating meaningful progress on governance and human rights benchmarks. Losing these preferences again would be a devastating blow to an economy that is still recovering from the catastrophic financial crisis of 2022.
Premadasa's Warning: A Political and Economic Alarm
In his strongly worded statement, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa did not mince words. He accused President Dissanayake's government of pushing legislation that, under the guise of counter-terrorism measures, would effectively criminalize peaceful protest, suppress freedom of expression, and target political opponents and civil society activists. Premadasa argued that such laws directly contradict the core human rights and democratic governance conditions that the European Union requires GSP+ beneficiary countries to uphold.
The EU's GSP+ framework is explicitly tied to a country's compliance with 27 international conventions covering human rights, labour rights, environmental protection, and good governance principles. Any perception that a beneficiary country is backsliding on these commitments can trigger a formal review process, which could ultimately result in the suspension or withdrawal of trade benefits. Premadasa's warning is therefore not merely a political attack on the government — it is a substantive alert grounded in the mechanics of how the GSP+ system actually operates.
The Controversial Counter-Terrorism Legislation
The proposed counter-terrorism law at the centre of this controversy has drawn criticism from multiple quarters, including human rights organizations, legal experts, and civil society groups. Critics argue that the legislation contains vaguely worded provisions that could be broadly interpreted to label ordinary forms of dissent — such as protests, strikes, and public demonstrations — as acts of terrorism or threats to national security. This kind of sweeping language, opponents say, is a hallmark of authoritarian legislation that has no place in a functioning democracy.
The government, for its part, has defended the proposed law as a necessary modernization of Sri Lanka's legal framework for dealing with genuine security threats. Officials have argued that the existing legal tools are outdated and insufficient to address contemporary challenges. However, critics remain unconvinced, pointing out that the draft legislation has not undergone adequate public consultation and that its provisions go far beyond what is necessary or proportionate for legitimate counter-terrorism purposes.
International Eyes on Colombo
The European Union has been watching Sri Lanka's democratic trajectory closely. EU officials and diplomats have repeatedly emphasized that the continuation of GSP+ benefits is contingent on demonstrable and sustained progress in areas including judicial independence, press freedom, and the protection of civil liberties. Any legislative move that is perceived as rolling back these freedoms will inevitably attract scrutiny from Brussels and could accelerate a formal review of Sri Lanka's GSP+ eligibility.
Human rights organizations operating internationally have already flagged concerns about the direction of governance under the current administration, and Premadasa's statement is likely to amplify those concerns on the international stage. The opposition leader's intervention serves as both a domestic political challenge to the government and a signal to international partners that Sri Lanka's civil society and democratic institutions are pushing back against what they see as authoritarian overreach.
What Happens Next?
The coming weeks will be critical. If the government proceeds with the proposed legislation without meaningful amendments that address the concerns raised by critics, Sri Lanka may find itself facing uncomfortable questions from EU officials during the next GSP+ monitoring cycle. The stakes could not be higher for ordinary Sri Lankans whose livelihoods depend on the country's export industries.
Opposition Leader Premadasa has called on the government to immediately withdraw the proposed law, engage in genuine consultations with legal experts and civil society, and prioritize Sri Lanka's international obligations over what he characterized as a political agenda to consolidate power. Whether the government heeds this warning remains to be seen, but the economic consequences of ignoring it could prove severe and long-lasting for a nation still finding its footing after years of turmoil.