Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa has issued a stark warning that Sri Lanka could forfeit its crucial GSP+ trade concessions from the European Union if the government proceeds with its proposed anti-terrorism legislation in its current form. The warning has reignited a fierce debate in Colombo over the balance between national security priorities and the country's economic lifelines, with trade experts and civil society groups now closely watching how the government responds to mounting pressure from multiple fronts.
What Is GSP+ and Why Does It Matter to Sri Lanka?
The Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus, commonly known as GSP+, is a preferential trade arrangement offered by the European Union to developing countries. Under this scheme, Sri Lanka enjoys significantly reduced or zero tariffs on thousands of export products entering the EU market. The garment and textile sector, which employs hundreds of thousands of Sri Lankans — a large proportion of them women — is among the biggest beneficiaries of this arrangement.
Sri Lanka previously lost GSP+ status in 2010 following concerns raised by the European Union over human rights violations, particularly in the aftermath of the civil war. The country regained access to the scheme in 2017 after demonstrating commitments to improving its human rights record and ratifying key international conventions. Losing these concessions again would be a devastating blow to an economy that is still recovering from the catastrophic financial crisis of 2022, which saw the country default on its foreign debt for the first time in its history.
Premadasa's Warning and the Anti-Terror Legislation
Speaking publicly on the matter, Sajith Premadasa, who leads the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) opposition party, expressed serious concern that the proposed anti-terrorism laws contain provisions that could be interpreted as incompatible with internationally recognised human rights standards. He argued that the European Union closely monitors the legislative environment of GSP+ beneficiary countries and that any law perceived as enabling the suppression of civil liberties, freedom of expression, or the rights of minorities could trigger a formal review of Sri Lanka's eligibility.
Premadasa urged the government to consult widely with legal experts, civil society organisations, and international partners before advancing the legislation. He emphasised that economic recovery must not be sacrificed at the altar of laws that could isolate Sri Lanka from its most important trading partners. The opposition leader also called on the government to engage directly with EU officials to understand what specific benchmarks must be met to ensure continued access to GSP+ benefits.
Civil Society and Legal Experts Share Concerns
Premadasa's warning is not an isolated voice. Human rights organisations operating within Sri Lanka and internationally have long raised red flags about proposed anti-terrorism frameworks that they argue grant excessive powers to security forces without adequate judicial oversight. Critics point to provisions that could allow for prolonged detention without trial, restrictions on legal representation, and broad definitions of terrorism that might be used to target journalists, activists, and political dissidents.
Legal experts have noted that the EU's GSP+ mechanism requires beneficiary countries to effectively implement 27 core international conventions covering human rights, labour rights, environmental protection, and good governance principles. If domestic legislation is seen to contradict or undermine commitments under these conventions, Brussels has both the authority and the precedent to initiate a withdrawal process. The process typically involves a formal investigation period, during which the country in question is given an opportunity to address concerns, but the reputational and economic damage can begin well before any formal decision is made.
Government's Position and the Road Ahead
The government has defended the proposed legislation as a necessary tool to address evolving security threats and to modernise an outdated legal framework that critics on the other side argue has long been inadequate. Officials have insisted that the new laws will include safeguards to prevent abuse and that concerns raised by opposition figures are politically motivated rather than grounded in genuine legal analysis.
However, with Sri Lanka's export sector still fragile and foreign exchange reserves only gradually stabilising after years of economic turmoil, the stakes of getting this wrong are exceptionally high. Industry associations representing apparel exporters have reportedly begun their own quiet lobbying efforts, urging all parties to find a legislative solution that satisfies security objectives without jeopardising market access.
A Critical Moment for Sri Lanka's Recovery
Sri Lanka stands at a crossroads. The country's economic recovery depends heavily on maintaining strong trade relationships with the European Union, and GSP+ is central to that relationship. Sajith Premadasa's warning serves as a timely reminder that domestic legislative decisions do not exist in a vacuum — they carry real consequences for workers on factory floors, exporters navigating competitive global markets, and a population that has already endured years of severe economic hardship. How the government navigates this tension between security legislation and international obligations will be one of the defining political and economic tests of the months ahead.