brand logo

De-radicalisation programme: New mechanism to address ideological extremism: Prof. Rohan Gunaratna

16 Oct 2021

  • Says rehabilitation a gamechanger in fight against extremism and terrorism
By Yoshitha Perera While different parties raised concerns that the de-radicalisation or rehabilitation of suspected extremists by the State would leave room for arbitrary detention, the Government was of the view that rehabilitation and community engagement was a new frontline in the struggle against ideological extremism and its violent forms. In an interview with The Sunday Morning, Institute of National Security Studies (INSS) Director General Prof. Rohan Gunaratna said that rehabilitation was a gamechanger in the fight against exclusivism, extremism, and terrorism.  He explained the process of the de-radicalisation programme in Sri Lanka and how the Government planned to introduce de-radicalised individuals back into society. Following are excerpts of the interview. What is de-radicalisation? De-radicalisation is the process of transforming radicalised individuals into individuals who are better adjusted to society. When vulnerable persons are exposed to radical thoughts and ideas, they depart from mainstream living and embrace deviant living. This may entail moving away from being Sri Lankan and embracing ideologies and ideas that may turn out to be damaging to Sri Lankan society. De-radicalisation is the process used to reverse radicalisation. Can you briefly describe the de-radicalisation programmes in Sri Lanka? Those exposed to violence and extremist ideologies and ideas need to be rehabilitated. Otherwise, they will pose a security threat, spread their ideologies and ideas among others, and be hailed as heroes by existing and future extremists and terrorists. In rehabilitating a person exposed to extremist and violent ideologies, the experts will apply six modes of rehabilitation, known as the “6+1 Model”. This entails: (1) Religious and spiritual rehabilitation, (2) educational rehabilitation, (3) vocational rehabilitation, (4) social and family rehabilitation, (5) creative arts in rehabilitation, and (6) psychological rehabilitation. After they are engaged and empowered away from extremism and violence, they are reintegrated back into their family and society. Thereafter, according to the 6+1 Model, they will be monitored to ensure that they remain in the mainstream. Reintegration is done with the aim of ensuring a de-radicalised person does not relapse to extremist ideologies and violence. In parallel, the Government should ensure that religious institutions do not propagate exclusivist, extremist, or terrorist ideas and ideologies. This involves screening religious clerics and ensuring they know how to live in a multi-ethnic and a multi-religious society where all religions are respected and religious harmony is treasured. The 6+1 Model was developed by Dr. Malkanthi Hettiarachchi, and there is a research paper on that (“Sri Lanka’s Rehabilitation Programme: A New Frontier in Counter Terrorism and Counter Insurgency”). The genesis of the 6+1 Model in Sri Lanka can be traced back to Singapore’s rehabilitation programme where religious rehabilitation, social and family rehabilitation, and psychological rehabilitation were provided to terrorist detainees. In addition, other best practices from other rehabilitation programmes worldwide were introduced to the Sri Lankan programme. For example, in Saudi Arabia, when a terrorist detainee enters the rehabilitation programme, he or she is referred to as a beneficiary and not an extremist or detainee. It is imperative for anyone who qualifies and joins the rehabilitation programme to be thought of as a beneficiary, because he or she will benefit from rehabilitation. A gamechanger in the fight against exclusivism, extremism, and terrorism is rehabilitation. How does the Government plan to introduce beneficiaries (de-radicalised individuals) back into society? After their rehabilitation is completed, the beneficiaries will be assessed for their level of radicalisation and de-radicalisation. If the radicalisation level reaches a certain threshold, they should be handed over to the parents or the guardian, who will guarantee the safety and security of that individual. The Government will also periodically check on that individual and support his or her peaceful reintegration back into their family, the community, and society. Many claimed that Sri Lanka’s de-radicalisation regulations would allow for the arbitrary administrative detention of people for up to two years without trial. What is your view on this? The Sri Lankan rehabilitation programme is hailed as one of the top four “developed” rehabilitation programmes in the world. The other three are the programmes in Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia. Rehabilitation is an alternative to punishment. Those who are rehabilitated are given a second chance to live a normal life. If successfully rehabilitated, a person can lead a normal life without harming themselves and society, and become a productive citizen. Rehabilitation is a global imperative; no one should oppose rehabilitation. Concerns were also raised that these regulations could disproportionately target minority religious and ethnic communities. What are your thoughts? Rehabilitation should be administered to anyone who embraces harmful ideologies and threatens communities and societies. Rehabilitation is not targeted at any single community. It is true that the rehabilitation programme was initially designed to rehabilitate Tamil separatists, and currently it is being re-designed for rehabilitating Islamic State extremists. However, in the future, we may have to rehabilitate even those who misinterpret and misrepresent Buddhism to advance their extremist agenda. All religions have been misused by exclusivists, extremists, and terrorists, and the Government should have no qualms in rehabilitating anyone who has stepped out of mainstream living and poses a threat to the security and stability of the community, society, and country. What de-radicalisation methods and techniques used overseas has Sri Lanka studied and/or incorporated? Are they in line with international best practices? The Sri Lankan rehabilitation programme was reviewed by Prof. Arie. W. Kruglanski of the University of Maryland and Prof. Michelle Gelfand of Stanford University. They are world-class psychologists and they visited rehabilitation centres in Sri Lanka. As the Defence Secretary (at the time), Gotabaya Rajapaksa granted a five-year authorisation for Prof. Kruglanski and Prof. Gelfand to visit any beneficiary or rehabilitation centre and interview those undergoing rehabilitation. Their research is published in a book titled “The Three Pillars of Radicalisation” (by Arie W. Kruglanski, Jocelyn J. Bélanger, and Rohan Gunaratna). The Sri Lankan programme is used as a reference in other rehabilitation programmes worldwide. For instance, details on Sri Lanka’s programme were shared in the dialogue on improving Pakistan’s rehabilitation process. How can we use de-radicalisation as a tool for reconciliation rather than division? De-radicalisation or rehabilitation is one of the most effective tools to unite communities. The Tamils and the Sinhalese lived as brothers and sisters before the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) (Tamil New Tigers at the time) assassinated then Mayor of Jaffna Alfred Duraiappah in 1975. Similarly, the LTTE assassinated Tamil politicians, and assassinated and attempted to assassinate Tamils who were serving in the national political parties. Gradually, the separatist ideology divided a segment of the Tamils from the Sinhalese and the Muslims. (Approximately) 12,000 former members of the LTTE who were rehabilitated do not have such extremist thoughts. While they were in rehabilitation, they realised that there was no difference between Sinhalese, Tamils, and Muslims. The former LTTE members realised that they were indoctrinated by the LTTE based on false narratives. Rehabilitation proved to be a magic tool for reconciliation and harmonious living. There is concern about the de-radicalisation programme being handled by the military and the Ministry of Defence. Can you explain why Sri Lanka has chosen this particular route and give examples of other countries that use a similar system? The military, law enforcement, and intelligence officers should direct and secure any rehabilitation programme. However, the rehabilitation practitioners are professionals with a range of skills, such as trained spiritual and religious leaders who deliver religious rehabilitation; teachers who deliver educational rehabilitation; vocational instructors from the government and private sectors, who provide vocational training and instructions; social workers who provide social and family rehabilitation; creative artists with specialty in music, dance, and literature, who broaden the mind with the arts and culture; and psychologists and counsellors who address the psychological challenges experiencing by the beneficiaries. Greece was one of the first countries in the ancient world to develop a rehabilitation programme. In the contemporary period, the British introduced rehabilitation programmes in Malaysia to fight the communists, and in Kenya to fight the Mau Mau Uprising. With the rise of Islamic extremism, Egypt developed the first rehabilitation programme in the Muslim world. Today, rehabilitation is used widely in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East as well as the West. Some of the rehabilitation programmes have been very successful and others have faced challenges. For instance, the rehabilitation programmes in Afghanistan and Iraq failed. However, for rehabilitation to succeed, there should be real experts with experience and expertise assigned to deliver rehabilitation. Without trained clerics, teachers, vocational instructors, social workers, artists, counsellors, and psychologists, rehabilitation won’t be successful. Trust and transparency are important in winning community support for any rehabilitation or de-radicalisation programme. Given the current state of continued detention without proper legal access or charges, like in the cases of Attorney-at-Law Hejaaz Hizbullah and poet Ahnaf Jazeem, how can you expect a family member, who identifies or suspects a loved one to be drawn to extremism ideologies, to come forward and seek help from the Government? The Government should publicise the rehabilitation programme and raise public awareness, so that people will support the rehabilitation agenda. Those who are in detention should have access to their families and loved ones. In fact, one of the most effective modes of rehabilitation is to reunite the exclusivists, extremists, and terrorists with their families. When an individual embraces exclusivism and extremist and terrorist ideologies, they isolate themselves from family and society. For example, the LTTE kept their members in safehouses in the cities and in camps in the jungle. In the case of the Islamic State, the members were kept in safehouses in (areas such as) Katuwapitiya, Enderamulla, and Panadura. Those in isolation did not have proper family lives. One of the modes of the rehabilitation process is to reconnect them back to family and society.


More News..