Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) has formally raised significant concerns over the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill, which was gazetted on the 22nd of September 2026. The bill, intended to replace the long-criticized Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), has drawn sharp scrutiny from civil society organizations, human rights advocates, and legal experts across the country. While the government has positioned the new legislation as a modernized and more balanced approach to countering terrorism, critics argue that it may replicate — and in some cases intensify — the very problems that plagued its predecessor.
Background: Why the PTA Was Controversial
The Prevention of Terrorism Act has been one of the most contested pieces of legislation in Sri Lanka's modern legal history. Enacted as a temporary measure decades ago, the PTA became a permanent fixture that was repeatedly used to detain individuals — often from minority communities — without trial for extended periods. International human rights bodies, foreign governments, and domestic civil society groups consistently called for its repeal or substantial reform. The promise of replacing the PTA with a more rights-compliant law was seen as a critical step toward democratic accountability and justice reform in Sri Lanka.
However, TISL and other human rights actors are now warning that the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill may fall far short of those expectations. Rather than delivering a clean break from the PTA's problematic legacy, the proposed legislation appears to carry forward — and potentially expand — several of its most troubling provisions.
Key Concerns Raised by TISL
One of the most pressing issues highlighted by TISL relates to the bill's broad and vague definitions of terrorism. Overly expansive definitions of what constitutes a terrorist act or a terrorist organization create serious risks of misuse. When the legal threshold for "terrorism" is poorly defined, it opens the door for authorities to target legitimate dissent, peaceful protest, journalism, and civil society activism under the guise of national security enforcement.
TISL also draws attention to the expanded executive powers embedded within the proposed legislation. Granting the executive branch sweeping authority to designate individuals or groups as threats — without adequate judicial oversight or parliamentary scrutiny — undermines the fundamental principle of separation of powers. In a functioning democracy, such extraordinary powers must be balanced by robust checks and accountability mechanisms, which critics argue are conspicuously absent from the current draft.
Administrative detention is another critical area of concern. The bill reportedly retains provisions that allow for the detention of suspects for prolonged periods without charge or trial. This practice, widely condemned under international human rights law, has historically been weaponized against political opponents, ethnic minorities, and activists in Sri Lanka. Allowing such detention to continue under new legislation would represent a significant setback for civil liberties in the country.
Restrictions on Fundamental Rights
Beyond detention, TISL has flagged concerns about restrictions on fundamental rights embedded within the proposed bill. These include potential limitations on freedom of expression, freedom of association, and the right to a fair trial. Any anti-terrorism legislation must strike a careful and deliberate balance between protecting national security and upholding the constitutional rights guaranteed to every citizen. Legal experts warn that the current draft tips that balance dangerously in favor of state authority at the expense of individual freedoms.
The concerns raised are not merely procedural or technical. They reflect a deeper anxiety about how such legislation could be applied in practice, particularly against vulnerable communities who have historically borne the brunt of security-focused laws in Sri Lanka. Tamil communities, Muslim minorities, and political dissidents have all faced disproportionate targeting under the PTA, and without meaningful safeguards, the new bill risks perpetuating those injustices.
Calls for Meaningful Reform and Consultation
TISL is joining a growing chorus of voices urging the government to undertake a thorough and inclusive review of the proposed bill before it proceeds further through the legislative process. This includes meaningful consultation with civil society organizations, legal professionals, affected communities, and international human rights bodies. Transparency and public participation in the drafting of such consequential legislation are not optional — they are essential to ensuring that the final law reflects democratic values and international human rights standards.
The organization has also called on parliament to exercise its oversight role diligently, ensuring that any counter-terrorism framework adopted by Sri Lanka is consistent with the country's obligations under international law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Sri Lanka is a signatory.
Conclusion
The Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill represents a pivotal moment for Sri Lanka's democratic trajectory. TISL's concerns serve as a timely and important reminder that replacing a flawed law with another equally flawed — or potentially worse — piece of legislation is not progress. True reform demands courage, transparency, and an unwavering commitment to human rights. The government now faces a critical choice: deliver meaningful change or risk entrenching the same cycles of abuse that the new bill was meant to end.