Freedom of Conscience & Belief

Corona and curtailed Human Rights

First published on 3rd May 2020 at http://www.commonviews.org/corona-and-curtailed-human-rights/

As fears and concerns persist about spread of COVID19 in Sri Lanka, there are rising fears and concerns about declining democracy and rising threats to rule of law and rights violations. Rights are being restricted, powers of the executive, police, military, and government officials are increasing and checks and balances and possibilities of legal remedies for victims are decreasing. Governments, some media, and others with vested interests are seeking to propagate that these must be tolerated at the time of crisis. In any crisis, the politically, economically and socially vulnerable and marginalized become even more vulnerable and marginalized.  In Sri Lanka, they include COVID19 patients and their families, families of those who died, survivors and families of past victims of past rights violations, ethnic and religious minorities, those with disabilities, women, children, elderly, refugees, prisoners, farmers, fisherfolk, factory workers, estate workers and workers in the informal sector etc. Below are some significant rights concerns amidst the fight against COVID19 in Sri Lanka.

1. Stigmatizing and degrading treatment to the deceased, patients and the poor

The first Sri Lankan COVID19 infected person was identified on 11th March. Since then some TV stations and social media had publicized false information about the patients, suspected patients, and even the dead. They had invaded the privacy of patients and suspected patients, those being quarantined, often in the presence police and military, and with their tacit support. It was only after around six weeks of this drama that the Secretary to the Ministry of defense appealed to stop this after about 250 military personnel were infected. On 17th April, police lined up over 300 beggars in Colombo and compelled them to have a bath in the open air without any privacy, with media being allowed to film and take photographs, resulting in this being a splash on national TV stations newspapers and social media. Photos and videos indicated some men having collective showers, without maintaining physical distance. Disinfecting of both men and women was also done in public, in front of cameras. Some media used the term “watte” to describe an area in Colombo where large numbers of COVID19 infected patients were found. This term implies low-income areas with small and basic houses close to each other with basic facilities, such as shared toilets. The lady who was believed to be the first patient from this community was particularly targeted, being referred to as the “Coronona lady”, thereby setting the area on “COVID fire”.

2. Hostility towards Muslims and Christians

Muslims have been blamed for being responsible for COVID19 and were the target of hate speech, and much of this was based on false news. On two occasions, police had arrested some persons, but most seemed to get away with hate speech and false news. The World Health Organization’s guidelines pertaining to the disposal of bodies of those who die of COVID19 provide for both cremation and burial, which was reflected in Sri Lankan Health Ministry guidelines of 27th March. But officials hurriedly cremated the first Muslim in Sri Lanka who died of COVID19, being indifferent to the wishes of the family and Muslim community leaders and then amended their guidelines to allow only cremations, without any explanation for the changes. On one occasion, constant reference by many media, especially Tamil media, to religion and occupation of one infected person as a “Pastor” has created an environment where there could be hate and hostility towards the Christian community of that person or to Christians more broadly.

3. Prisoners and Refugees 

Even before COVID19 deaths in Sri Lanka, two prisoners died of shooting, in COVID19 related tensions in a prison. Sri Lankan prisons have a capacity to accommodate 10,000 people but are overcrowded, with about 26,000 inmates at present, making them high-risk places for COVID19, with no possibility for social distancing and hygienic practices. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and civil society groups were demanding the release of prisoners. The government had released about 3000 by early April, and the Attorney General had advised the police on schemes of releasing more prisoners. However, some inmates, such as those detained for long periods under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), without having been charged and trials being completed are not included in these schemes. Detainees who were released last month had reported of beatings, severe overcrowding, and unhygienic conditions, and lack of adequate medical facilities in detention facilities. As visits by families and well-wishers have been stopped, detainees are unable to get even their basic needs from outside.

Refugees and asylum seekers living in Sri Lanka temporarily are not included in assistance schemes by the government and various UN agencies. In the context of curfews in the country and lockdowns across the world, they also find it difficult to receive money from their friends and relatives, which had been crucial for their survival. Amidst widespread stigmatization of Sri Lankan Muslims, refugees also fear being perceived as being Muslims and being targeted, similar to the way they faced physical attacks and evictions after Easter Sunday bombings. And in the long term, they fear that their already delayed resettlement to 3rd countries such as the USA and Canada may be further delayed.

4. Right to food, emergency assistance and workers

With the imposition of island-wide curfew for one month, food became a major concern, particularly for poorer sections of society. The government announced a relief package of Rs. 5000 per family, focusing on daily wage owners and other low-income earners, but there have been widespread allegations of officials charging money for applications, long lines of people to collect the Rs. 5,000, allegations of being left out unfairly, tensions between beneficiaries and officials. The assistance scheme is said to be in favor of government supporters. Many migrant workers from far away districts had been stranded, without income or food, but had not received any government assistance. Calls to designated numbers and meetings with local officials and police had not brought any relief. In the North and East, there were allegations that the Governors (representative of the President) were not approving the use of emergency funds by local government officials and local government officials had sought the help of civil society groups to provide humanitarian assistance to people in need. There have been several reports of those distributing humanitarian assistance being obstructed, facing intimidation, threats from politicians, police, and military, and some being arrested. Some workers had not received wages for work done before the sudden imposition of curfew and some employers are demanding amendment of labor laws that provide protection to workers from arbitrary termination.

5. Repression of free expression and impunity for hate speech, false and misleading news

One of the biggest blows to free expression was when online activist Ramzy Razeek was arrested on 9th April for a Facebook post calling for an ideological struggle using a pen and keyboard and media. He has been a consistent advocate of ethnic harmony and challenged extremism within the Muslim community and against Muslims. He has been remanded till 14th May and the police have implied intentions to charge him under the ICCPR Act. Ramzy had received death threats online and had complained to the police about these before his arrest, but no one has been arrested for death threats made against him.

On 1st April, the police announced that those criticizing and pointing out shortcomings of government officials would be arrested and have legal actions taken against them. Several people who had criticized the government were reported to have been arrested, faced intimidation and discrediting online. The media reported that Police were seeking to arrest 40 persons for spreading false information and there had been other reports that 17 had been arrested by 17th April.

However, the process of such arrests appears to be discriminatory targeting individuals who seem to be critical of the government with small outreach, whereas persons and media institutions supporting the government with massive outreach such as some TV stations and newspapers, seem to enjoy impunity for publishing false and misleading information. The “Sunday Observer”, a state-owned and controlled newspaper reported the Health Minister saying that “by April 19 all possible COVID-19 patients in Sri Lanka will disappear and the people who had it without any symptoms or with mild symptoms will completely recover”. Another leading newspaper, “Lankadeepa”, published headlines on its front page quoting the Director-General of Health Services as saying the risk of corona was over. This was corrected and an apology offered 2 days later, but with less prominence than the false headline. The media group “Ada Derana” published a hugely misleading graph about numbers of COVID19 patients in Sri Lanka. In early April, the Sri Lanka Tea Board reported that they had devised a plan to promote Ceylon black tea as a drink that could prevent COVID19, but the Director of the Sri Lanka Medical Research Institute was reported to have confirmed that there is no research on the benefits of drinking tea for Covid-19 patient and that it cannot be touted as a preventive measure or a treatment in the case of Covid-19. On 21st March, the former Governor of Western Province and National List candidate for upcoming Parliament elections from the President’s Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, Dr. Seetha Arambepola, was quoted as having said that the State Pharmaceutical Corporation had ample stocks of a secret medication for Corona, and that it could be used after approval from specialist doctors.

6. Militarization

The response to COVID19 in Sri Lanka is excessively militarized, with the Army Commander being appointed as the head of the National Operations Centre on COVID19. The Secretary to the Ministry of Defiance, a retired senior Army officer, features prominently and regularly on national media on matters relating to COVID19 than any other Ministry Secretary. A Presidential Task Force in charge of Economic Revival and Poverty Eradication is also packed with military officers. The military has been involved in running a large number of quarantine centres and in the heavily militarized war-ravaged north, the military is also involved in curfew pass issuing activities.  This militarization is in context of the military personnel in Sri Lanka having been convicted and still standing accused in pending cases for massacres, killings and abductions by Sri Lankan courts and facing allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity from the UN and international human rights groups, with the present Army Commander having been banned from entering the United States of America earlier this year. On one occasion, soldiers had removed a family from a village facing a high risk of COVID19 without the knowledge of the health authorities. People in the North protested in fear about schools in the North being used for quarantining military personnel, and later, the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence said that schools will be used to accommodate soldiers and not as quarantine centres. Surveillance of activists and journalists by intelligence agents, which was common in Sri Lanka during and after the war, may expand during and post COVID19 operations by the military, with the Secretary to Ministry of Defence claiming that he has details of all COVID19 victims in his mobile phone.

7. Rule of Law and Political crisis

While accepting the need for curfew, at least one senior lawyer and others have pointed out the lack of legal basis for the curfew the government had announced since 20th March. More than 42,000 people have been arrested and more than 10,000 vehicles were taken into custody, and legality of this is also not clear. In Colombo and Jaffna, there have been allegations of people having been beaten up by police and the army for being on the street. The Coastal Conservation Department has been criticized for lack of environmental and social considerations in its Mount Lavinia beach development project and un-democratic, not-transparent action while the country was under lockdown due to COVID19.

There has also been widespread condemnation about the lack of due process in the arrest of prominent lawyer Hejaaz Hizbullah on 14th April. He had had very limited access to family and lawyers, the specific reasons for his arrest are not clear and the Attorney General and the police failed to turn up in courts when a habeas corpus application by his family was taken up in courts on 30th April.

The curfew had also restricted people’s access to courts to seek remedies for violations and imminent violations, particularly for those from poorer sections of society, for whom access to lawyers and legal remedies have always been limited, even prior to COVID19. Due to the limited number of court staff, it had become difficult for lawyers to obtain court proceedings and confer with detained clients, both of which can affect the preparation for court hearings.

In the early stages of curfew, President granted a pardon to a soldier convicted of the massacre of 8 Tamil civilians, including children. There has also been a report that the soldier had been paid back wages for the time he had been imprisoned and that the Army had accompanied him back home from prison.

On 2nd March, the President dissolved parliament advancing 6 months ahead of the schedule. However, the Election Commission postponed the elections and subsequently rescheduled it for 20th June. This will mean Sri Lanka will be without a parliament for more than the constitutionally allowed period of 3 months. This has led to some lawyers and politicians stating that the dissolving of parliament is invalid and old parliament has sprung back to life, as the presidential power to dissolve parliament early is subject to a condition of parliament re-convening within 3 months. Opposition politicians have also claimed the parliament needs to approve expenditure from 1st May onwards, but the government has insisted the President has constitutional powers to draw from the consolidated fund.

Conclusion

The number of COVID19 infected patients and deaths have been relatively less in Sri Lanka than many other countries, including in Asia. But the numbers of patients are rising, and so are fears, uncertainties, and economic woes, including food security, livelihoods, and unemployment. Reducing militarization and politicization and respect for rule of law, human rights, especially freedom of expression, rights of minorities, workers, and environmental justice will be crucial in determining Sri Lanka’s post COVID19 progress. Reviving long term struggles for justice, such as by communities whose lands were occupied by the military and families of those who disappeared will also pose a challenge.

Christians and Religious Freedom under fire

First published at http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2019/04/21/opinion/christians-and-religious-freedom-under-fire on 21st April 2019

From February 3 to April 14 this year, across Sri Lanka, there has been some sort of disruption against a Christian worship service every Sunday – on 11 successive Sundays to be specific.

Christians in Sri Lanka suffer violations of their right to religion and belief regularly, but most incidents do not make it to the news – or even to the Twittersphere. But the attack on the Methodist Church Centre in Anuradhapura, last Sunday, which was also Palm Sunday, a day of religious significance for Christians, was widely reported because of the forthright personal testimony and determined efforts of the President of the Methodist Conference, Bishop Asiri Perera, who had experienced the attack first hand.

In the past two months, this same church centre had obscenities shouted and stones pelted at it. A Municipal Councillor and villagers had forcibly broken in and threatened the priest and worshippers with assault. The Sunday before the Palm Sunday attack, they had cancelled the service due to intense pressure about the legality of their premises and services.

Types of violations

The violations reported this year against Christians include forcible entry to places of worship while services were ongoing, disrupting services, damaging properties, throwing stones and gathering outside places of worship in a threatening manner. Those leading prayers, hosting prayer services and participants have been threatened and obscene language used against them. Among the more serious violations was an assault of two females in two different incidents, a death threat and a threat to burn a place of worship.

At least 15 police complaints have been filed, some dealing with several violations. In some cases, police had refused or been reluctant to take complaints, sometimes going to the extent of siding with the alleged perpetrators, mocking and admonishing victims. On some occasions, police had refused to take matters to courts, demanded that victims file private plaints, and even refused to offer protection.

The right to Religion or belief cannot be restricted under any circumstances in the Sri Lankan Constitution. But one of the most regular violations have been questioning the legality of Christian prayers and places of worship, by Government officials, police, bhikkus and ordinary persons, often demanding registration, authorisation or approval from an official. Only on a few occasions have the police insisted on the right to freedom of religion or belief of Christians.

Numbers

This year, at least 13 churches and one individual have been affected in nine districts, with about 35 incidents and about 70 violations. Some churches have been affected multiple times, with multiple violations, such as disrupting a service, assault, death threats, shouting obscenities and damage to property.

Such violations against Christians have occurred regularly in Sri Lanka over several years, under successive governments.

A report by Verite Research in 2014 reported that a state institution or public servant was recorded as the key perpetrator of religious violence against Christians in 175 incidents (18%) out of 972 incidents examined between 1994 and 2014. Many of these have been diligently documented for years by the National Christian Evangelical Alliance of Sri Lanka. 226 incidents of violence against Christians have been reported between January 2015 – June 2017 and 86 incidents in 2018. Many of the Christians under attack have been small rural Christian communities.

They have had little support from Churches which wield more political-social influence such as the Catholic Church, and various inter-religious bodies operating at local and national level. Though I have focused on the situation of Christians here, Muslims too have been under fire in Sri Lanka, with some of the harshest violence against them being concentrated within a few days in towns such as Aluthgama in 2014 and Digana in 2018. There have also been reports of violations against Hindus.

Way forward

Impunity has served as a licence for continued violence against religious minorities. Despite compelling evidence in some incidents, there has been a reluctance to use the existing legal framework to arrest and prosecute those responsible. Ironically, the ICCPR Act was recently used to imprison a writer and suppress free expression based on complaints by a Buddhist group that the writer has caused pain of mind to Buddhists and insulted Buddhism, but the same Act has not been used to arrest and prosecute those responsible for blatant and serious violations against Christians. Political will and legal action is essential to protect the rights of religious minorities.

Asserting rights sensitively would help, but it is unfair to expect victims to compromise and tolerate violations of their inalienable rights. Rather, the ‘good’ among the majorities, especially, Buddhists, must proactively protect the rights of religious minorities being persecuted and the more influential Christian churches must show support and solidarity to smaller and more vulnerable churches.

Unless and until all persons and communities, especially, the minorities and the vulnerable, can freely practise their religion without fear, religious harmony and co-existence will be a myth.

****

Examples of violations against Christians in 2019

1. As a female pastor and worshippers were preparing for a Sunday worship service, a mob of around 200 led by some bhikkus had forcibly entered the church premises, demanded to stop the worship, threatened the worshippers in obscene language, and damaged furniture and roofing sheets. A bhikku had threatened the Christians with death if they refused to stop their worship. The mob had also dragged a female worshipper on to the street, threw her at the feet of the bhikkus, and beaten her, and she had to be hospitalised. Some of the bhikkus had lodged a complaint, claiming the pastor was breaching the peace. At an inquiry, the monks and villagers had demanded the pastor stop conducting her services and only engage in worship in private. The Officer-in Charge (OIC) had told the pastor to comply with the demands of the monks and said the police wouldn’t provide her with further protection.

2. While a Sunday worship service was ongoing, bhikkus and a group of youth had forcibly entered the place of worship, shouting in obscene language and threatened the worshippers. Later, the policemen in civil clothes had tried to compel the pastor to attend an inquiry within 15 minutes, despite the pastor’s request for adequate time to consult his lawyer.

3. While a Sunday worship service was ongoing, a bhikkus had stood outside taking pictures of the premises and later, a group of around 35 villagers had gathered and stoned the premises. They had forcibly entered the place of worship and demanded to stop the worship immediately and threatened to burn the building if they refused to comply. A few days later, the pastor’s residence was stoned by unidentified individuals. The Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of the police had refused the pastor’s request to refer the matter to court and told him to file a private plaint.

4. A pastor had received a copy of a letter addressed by a Divisional Secretary (DS) to the OIC of the local police, instructing the latter to stop Christian religious worship activities, claiming the place of worship was not registered with the DS. A few days later, while the Sunday service was ongoing, around 30 individuals, two police officers and the Grama Niladhari had questioned the pastor and told him to meet with the DS the following day. The DS had demanded the pastor stop his religious worship activities immediately and threatened to confiscate the pastor’s home (received through a tsunami resettlement scheme) if he refused to comply.

5. A group of 30 individuals had arrived at a place of worship and demanded to speak to the pastor, who was not there. Two individuals had then assaulted the female owner of the premises.

6. While a pastor and his wife were visiting a congregant’s home, a group of villagers had damaged the front door of the house and a cross hanging on it. The group had demanded to know about approval to carry out worship activities in the village and threatened the pastor. They had scolded the pastor’s wife in obscene language and attempted to assault the pastor. The police had been reluctant to take down the complaint.

7. Villagers had threatened a Christian not to invite a pastor to conduct bible studies in his home. Later, when he had gone to lodge another complaint to the police about threats to his life, he was arrested, based on a false allegation of assault. After he was released on bail, a government official had told him to stop having bible studies at his house.

Crippling civic organising, mobilising and resistance through Draft Amendment to the Act on NGOs

First published on 22nd March 2018 at http://groundviews.org/2018/03/22/crippling-civic-organising-mobilising-and-resistance-through-draft-ngo-act-amendment/

The author gratefully acknowledges insights and input from Attorney-at-law Ermiza Tegal.

On February 20, 2018, the Cabinet decided to publish the repressive Draft Act to Amend the Voluntary Social Service Organizations (Registration and Supervision) Act no. 31 of 1980 (LDO 32/2011) to a gazette and present it to Parliament for approval. As usual, the drafting has been done in secret with no consultations. To the best of my knowledge, the draft Act has not been made publicly available by the Government.[1]

In the face of mounting pressure and questions, today, more than a month after he had presented this draft Act to the Cabinet, Minister Mano Ganesan had belatedly committed to have a consultation with civil society on April 10, 2018 and assured that it won’t be gazettedpending observations at this consultation.[2] This is the same Minister who stated last year that he doesn’t “see any serious reason to regulate NGOs in this country” and that he doesn’t want to use the word, ‘Regulation’.[3]

The draft’s foremost stated purpose is “regulate, supervise & inspect” NGOs through a legalised “National Secretariat for NGOs (Hereafter referred to as the Secretariat)” under an unspecified Ministry. The Secretariat has investigative powers and assumes and duplicates functions of the Police. The extraordinary and excessive powers given to the Secretariat directly infringe on Freedom of Association, Freedom of expression, Freedom of Thought, Conscience & Belief and Right to Privacy. The draft gives the Director General of the Secretariat, the Minister in charge and the Ministry’s Secretary unprecedented control over any grouping defined as a NGO. It comes in the context of reporting and approval requirement currently in place for NGOs, having created a culture and expectations in the districts that NGOs have to be subservient to the local government officials.

Making collectives illegal and crippling independent civic organising and mobilising

The draft tries to capture a broad range of collectives or groups in it’s definition of an NGO[4]and compels them to register and obtain approval from the Secretariat for it’s existence, or become illegal. There are only very few exceptions.[5] This definition and compulsory registration and approval may bring under the Secretariat’s control or render illegal, groups promoting and protecting rights and interests of their members, formal and informal grouping of individuals, groups receiving funding or working voluntarily, movements that may be temporary or permanent and groups involved in initiatives of social entrepreneurship, public-private partnerships etc. It strikes at independent organising and mobilising initiatives and makes very vulnerable those campaigning on repealing or changing unjust laws, such as ones related to gender and sexuality and the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

Practically, if this draft is enacted, it may bring under its control or render illegal existing civic groups such as Purawesi Balaya (Citizens Power), National Movement for Just Society (NMJS), Lawyers for Democracy (LfD), Tamil Civil Society Forum (TCSF), Student Unions, Peoples Alliance for Right to Land (PARL), Peoples Movement against Port City, Women’s Action Network (WAN), movements of Relatives of Disappeared etc. One wonders whether groups such as the “Civil Monitoring Commission” initiated and led by Minister Mano Ganesan and others during the Rajapakse regime and “Mothers Front” led by Minister Mangala Samaraweera and others during Premadasa regime, as well as movements of the past such as Movement to Protect Eppawala Phospate Deposits, Movement for Inter-Racial Justice and Equality (MIRJE) and University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna) would have been willing to subject themselves to such controls.

Arbitrary registration, suspensions, cancellations and limited possibilities of Appeal

Under this draft Act, registration (and thereby legality) is dependent on whims and fancies of the Director General of the Secretariat and Ministries or Authorities which are “responsible for activities planned to be undertaken by the organization”. If registration is rejected, the appeals have to be made to the Secretary to the Ministry, under which the Secretariat functions, within 30 days.

The registration can be suspended or canceled (and thereby make the organisation illegal) for range of reasons. These includes if the Director General feels the organization is a threat or prejudicial to national security or public interest. An organisation can also be de-registered if the Secretary to the Ministry feels the organisation is operating contrary to the national interests. None of these terms are clearly defined and only possible appeals are to Provincial High Courts, within the very short span of 30 days.

Attack on ideological and physical autonomy of civic groupings

The proposed Act implies civic groups must agree to “common development needs” of the country as defined by or agreeable to the government. This is likely to marginalise groups that are challenging the government’s model of development, which is often pro rich, pro-market and non-participatory. It also infringes on autonomy and internal policies and practices of civic groups, by interfering and retaining the final say in matters such as a change of objectives, a change in the geographical area of work, the establishment of branches, a change of the group constitution, cooperation with other groupings and the government, networking and forming federations, standards of service, financial and policy management, making donations to other groups, fund raising from the public, change of name, change of address, flag, symbol, logo etc. Information on staff and volunteers can be obtained by the Secretariat up to 6 years after they have left the organisation.

Policing powers beyond ordinary Police powers

In ordinary law, the police requires a warrant to enter a premises and search, examine books, registers or records, make copies and extracts. But the draft Act allows the Secretariat a free hand to do this, without even a clearly defined criteria for reasonable suspicion of any illegal activities. The power to “request and obtain information” implies a group from which the Secretariat “requests” information cannot refuse, as the Secretariat has powers to “obtain”, not just to “request”. The Secretariat also has powers to investigate money laundering and terrorist financing, which ought to be by the Police.

Breaching Banking Confidentiality

Under ordinary law, when the Police requires information from banks in the course of investigations of alleged crimes, they have to provide explicit justifications and orders for banks to release information are only made by a judicial authority. But the draft law confers powers to the Secretariat to breach confidentiality of banking information, without reference to any criminal conduct, rendering individuals and entities engaged in non-governmental activity second class citizens. The draft Act compels banks to inform the Secretariat of deposits over Rs. 1 million and electronic funds transfers and all transactions over an amount prescribed by the Minister. Such control over groups defined as NGOs is in contrast to the government’s policy to liberalise capital flow, under which the new foreign exchange law[6] permits undeclared money held abroad up to the value of a million dollars to be brought into the country with no penalty, while amounts in excess could be brought with the payment of a one percent fee. This puts in an additional layer of surveillance over and above what the Central Bank would be doing with regard to fund flows into the country, again singling out those defined as NGOs.

Broad and Vaguely defined “NGO crimes”

The draft Act creates range of “offences under the Act”, some of which are broadly and vaguely defined and leave room for abuse. Offences includes non-registration, which violates Freedom of Association and the principle of “Voluntary Notification”. Even a simple request for information if deemed inadequately responded to may attract a Rs. 250,000 fine or one year imprisonment and thus, is likely to create a fear psychosis. The lack of certainty runs contrary to the basic tenet of rule of law. Yet, again the hypocracy of criminalising acts that may be administratively corrected, is patently obvious when compared to the Foreign Exchange Act (FEA), which replaces the Exchange Control Act (note the change in nomenclature away from the notion of ‘control’), which was described as a new law that “decriminalised exchange control violations and freed citizens from its draconian provisions. The responsibility to implement the new management system has been vested on the authorised dealers who are subject to neither criminal nor civil proceedings under FEA. Instead, they are disciplined through an administrative process”[7].

Blurring the lines between “government” and “non-governmental”

This draft in letter and spirit, appears to convert NGOs into GONGOs – Government controlled Non-Government Organisations. It attempts to make a non-governmental group primarily accountable to the government – instead of primary accountability being to it’s members and to values they espouse, intended beneficiaries and donors – ignoring that the government is often the very body such groups seek a distinction from and often aim to monitor, critique and challenge.

Civic collectives and individuals involved in such groups must not be above the law – given that problems such as financial mismanagement, sexual harassment, gender based discrimination and abuse of worker’s rights, also occur in these entities, just las they do in government agencies and the private sector. But this must be done through ordinary law, which is applicable to all, without resorting to ultra-intrusive laws, discriminatory laws, which has the high potential to facilitate witch-hunts, to blur the line between what is “government” and what is “non-governmental / civic” and cripple independent organising and mobilising that a government may feel challenged by. Legal frameworks to address money laundering and other criminal activity must be uniformly applied instead of targeting NGOs in this disproportionate and unjustified way.

There is no point in trying to reform or engage with this draft law. It must be opposed in its entirety. If at all we need an additional law, it must be a “Freedom of Association Act” that promotes Freedom of Association, with registration based on principle of “Voluntary Notification” and not a restrictive law to make “non-governmental / civic” groupings pawns of the government.


[1] But drafts in three languages has been uploaded by concerned activists, and are available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HQJTYaXMBzrMFVkABruRnW53WdrwU8ES/view?usp=sharing(English), https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jlZw5mhi5hnHtDZfv-C6nGeeouU7834s/view?usp=sharing (Sinhala) and https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ngRI7i-R-RlglZxsFlykZZRM09lGQp1r/view?usp=sharing (Tamil)

[2] https://twitter.com/ManoGanesan/status/976728773386158080

[3] Statement by Minister Mano Ganesan on 1st July 2017

[4] Includes any association, council, society, trust, foundation, federation, movement, center, consortium, company, guarantee limited companies, private companies receiving foreign funds for non-profit oriented activities, any organization under any written law or incorporated under Standing Orders of the Parliament or any other association of persons, branches of overseas registered organizations,

[5] Examples of exceptions mentioned are places of religious worship, banks, public quoted companies, school development societies, alumni associations, trade unions, political parties and any such organizations

[6] Foreign Exchange Act No 12 of 2017

[7] Statement by Former Central Bank Deputy Governor W A Wijewardene as quoted in article titled ‘Exchange control will become obsolete – Economist’, Sunday Observer found at http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2017/12/03/exchange-control-will-become-obsolete-economist