Sri Lanka's proposed Anti-Terrorism Act has drawn fierce criticism from Human Rights Watch and civil society organizations, who warn the legislation could enable systematic violations of fundamental human rights. The controversial bill represents a significant departure from the government's previous commitments to end decades of rights abuses and reform the country's oppressive counterterrorism framework.
Breaking Government Promises
The proposed legislation directly contradicts the Sri Lankan government's earlier pledges to dismantle the notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), which has been widely criticized for facilitating arbitrary detention, torture, and other serious human rights violations. Human Rights Watch emphasizes that rather than replacing the problematic PTA with rights-respecting legislation, the new Anti-Terrorism Act would perpetuate and potentially expand the authorities' capacity for abuse.
The timing of this proposal is particularly concerning given Sri Lanka's ongoing economic crisis and political instability. Critics argue that the government may be seeking to consolidate power and suppress dissent under the guise of national security, a pattern seen repeatedly in countries facing internal challenges.
Problematic Provisions and Concerns
The draft Anti-Terrorism Act contains several provisions that human rights organizations consider deeply troubling. The legislation reportedly includes overly broad definitions of terrorism that could criminalize legitimate forms of protest, journalism, and civil society activities. Such vague language creates opportunities for selective enforcement against government critics, opposition politicians, and minority communities.
Extended detention periods without judicial oversight represent another major concern. The proposed law would allow authorities to hold suspects for prolonged periods without proper legal representation or court review, echoing the most problematic aspects of the current PTA. This provision directly violates international human rights standards regarding due process and the presumption of innocence.
Additionally, the bill lacks adequate safeguards against torture and other forms of ill-treatment in custody. Given Sri Lanka's documented history of torture in detention facilities, the absence of robust protective mechanisms is particularly alarming to rights advocates.
Historical Context of Abuse
Sri Lanka's counterterrorism laws have long been criticized by international human rights organizations, the United Nations, and donor countries. The Prevention of Terrorism Act, enacted in 1979, became a tool for widespread human rights violations during the country's decades-long civil conflict and beyond. Even after the war's end in 2009, the PTA continued to be used against minorities, journalists, and civil society activists.
The European Union and other international partners have repeatedly called for the PTA's repeal as a condition for improved relations and trade benefits. The government's failure to deliver meaningful reforms has strained these relationships and contributed to Sri Lanka's international isolation.
Civil Society Response
Sri Lankan civil society organizations have mobilized significant opposition to the proposed legislation. Protests outside the United Nations office in Colombo and other demonstrations highlight the deep public concern about the bill's implications for democratic freedoms and minority rights.
Legal experts and bar associations have also voiced strong objections, arguing that the proposed law fails to meet basic constitutional and international legal standards. They emphasize that effective counterterrorism legislation must balance security concerns with fundamental rights protections, something the current draft fails to achieve.
International Implications
The proposed Anti-Terrorism Act threatens to further damage Sri Lanka's already strained international relationships. The European Union's GSP+ trade preferences, which provide crucial economic benefits, are contingent on the country's implementation of international human rights conventions. Enacting legislation that facilitates rights violations could jeopardize these arrangements at a time when Sri Lanka desperately needs international economic support.
The United Nations Human Rights Council has maintained close scrutiny of Sri Lanka's human rights record, and the proposed legislation could trigger additional international pressure and potential sanctions. This would compound the country's existing economic and diplomatic challenges.
Path Forward
Human Rights Watch and other organizations are calling for the complete rejection of the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act in its current form. Instead, they advocate for genuine consultation with civil society, legal experts, and affected communities to develop legislation that effectively addresses legitimate security concerns while fully respecting human rights.
Any new counterterrorism law should include narrow, precise definitions of terrorism, robust judicial oversight of detention and surveillance powers, absolute prohibitions on torture, and strong protections for fundamental freedoms of expression, assembly, and association.
The Sri Lankan government faces a critical choice: honor its commitments to human rights reform and democratic governance, or retreat into the failed policies of the past. The international community and Sri Lankan citizens alike are watching closely to see which path the country's leaders will choose.