The National People’s Power (NPP) Government faces a critical dilemma regarding the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), which has been invoked twice since its Leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake assumed office as President.
Recent arrests under the PTA include individuals linked to an alleged security threat against Israeli tourists in Arugam Bay and others accused of displaying Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)-related symbols during Maaveerar Naal (Great Heroes’ Day) commemorations. These incidents have drawn heightened scrutiny due to the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna’s (JVP) historical opposition to the PTA, stemming from its own experience of suppression under the act during its insurrections.
The PTA, long condemned as a draconian law violating human rights, has faced pressure from global bodies like the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and European Union (EU) for repeal or reform. Attempts to introduce replacement laws such as the Counter-Terrorism Bill (2018) and the Anti-Terrorism Bill (2023) have failed due to concerns over excessive suppression.
The NPP Government now grapples with balancing the enforcement of the PTA with its moral stance on remembrance rights and the urgent need to introduce human rights-compliant legislation to resolve this predicament. Much of the speeches in Parliament were dedicated to the NPP’s U-turn from its formerly strong stance against the use of the PTA.
Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) Member of Parliament (MP) Dayasiri Jayasekara highlighted that a few persons from the north had been arrested under different laws for commemorating Maaveerar Naal, while two others from the south had been arrested under the PTA for spreading false information.
Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa also echoed similar sentiments, stating that the NPP’s mandate came with several expectations and that its role reversal had proved to be a disappointment to the people who gave it the vast mandate.
Prisons Department Media Spokesperson and Prisons Commissioner Gamini B. Dissanayake said that according to the latest available data, as of 4 October, there were eight prisoners convicted under the PTA owing to activities relating to the LTTE, with six prisoners arrested under the PTA yet to be convicted.
He further stated that there were 28 prisoners continuing in detention for their suspected role in the Easter Sunday attacks and pending a verdict for conviction.
The controversy
The PTA has been a source of contention in Sri Lankan politics for decades, particularly among the NPP, which has long advocated for its abolition.
The PTA allows the government to detain individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism without trial, a power that has been criticised for violating basic human rights. The dilemma for the NPP, however, is deeply intertwined with its role in governance and its longstanding stance against such draconian laws.
Recently, the NPP Government found itself in a precarious position, having to respond to accusations of continuing the use of the PTA under President Dissanayake’s administration.
The use of the act became prominent after arrests were made following the commemoration of Maaveerar Naal on 27 November 2023. Those detained were allegedly involved in displaying LTTE-related imagery, an act that the Government framed as glorifying terrorism.
While NPP leaders, such as Dissanayake, have repeatedly expressed their opposition to the PTA, the political reality faced by the party is far more complicated. The NPP’s alliance with Tamil political figures, who support the rights of communities to commemorate their fallen, particularly those associated with the LTTE, further intensifies the challenge.
It has increasingly become apparent that despite the NPP’s position on human rights and legal reforms, it cannot easily disregard the practical realities of governance and security.
Expert opinions
Prof. Rohan Gunaratna, a renowned counter-terrorism expert, emphasised the importance of not glorifying terrorism, particularly in the context of the Maaveerar Naal commemorations.
He warned that permitting such glorification could normalise violence and create a dangerous precedent for future generations. Prof. Gunaratna’s remarks reflect his broader concerns about the PTA, which he described as a necessary tool in countering terrorism but one that needed reform to align with modern security challenges, particularly in light of internet-based radicalisation.
He advocated updates to the PTA, suggesting that models such as the US’s Patriot Act, or similar laws operating in the UK and Australia, which address both terrorism and extremism, offered more relevant frameworks for counter-terrorism in today’s world.
In contrast, Attorney-at-Law Swasthika Arulingam of the People’s Struggle Alliance (PSA) provided a critical perspective on the PTA amendments introduced in 2022. She argued that while these amendments formalised the process of detainee access to legal representation, they fell short in terms of offering meaningful change.
Arulingam criticised the amendments for codifying existing ineffective practices without truly addressing the systemic flaws of the PTA. In her view, the continued reliance on such a law only exacerbates the erosion of civil liberties, empowering the Executive and perpetuating a state of emergency.
She suggested that the PTA, in its current form, was morally flawed, calling for a broader reconsideration of how counter-terrorism laws were implemented in Sri Lanka.
Addressing the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Act No.12 of 2022, Arulingam noted the positives and negatives: “Before the PTA amendments, attorneys had access to detainees, but the process was cumbersome, often taking weeks. The amendments formalised this process but under specific regulations, which are yet to be fully clarified.
“Attorneys still need to go through the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID) for access, which could be denied or delayed. Essentially, the amendments codify existing practices without significantly enhancing access to legal counsel.”
She also noted that in relation to bail, the new amendments allowed detainees to apply for bail in the Court of Appeal after one year, when previously detainees had only been able to seek bail through Fundamental Rights (FR) petitions to the Supreme Court.
“While this is a positive step, it remains inaccessible to many economically marginalised individuals who lack resources to engage legal representation for the Court of Appeal. A fairer approach would be granting the right to bail at the Magistrate’s Court level, where legal representation is not always mandatory,” she noted.
In addition, Arulingam pointed to the inconsistencies in how the PTA was applied, especially when it came to events like Maaveerar Naal.
The Government’s stance – allowing the commemoration of the dead while restricting the use of LTTE symbols – has led to confusion, with critics accusing the Government of playing a dual game.
Arulingam contended that while the Government claimed to respect commemorative rights, it did so selectively, undermining the broader conversation about the rights of communities to remember their fallen in the context of a long and painful civil conflict.
Future of the PTA
Having met with criticism in Parliament on the abuse of the PTA and the role reversal of the NPP, Minister of Justice Harshana Nanayakkara echoed the recent NPP stance. “We shall not allow racism to raise its head in this country under any circumstances,” he said.
He went on to state that all existing laws would operate unequivocally and any offence would be dealt with severely using the existing legislation.
Speaking to The Sunday Morning, Deputy Minister of Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs Sunil Watagala claimed that the law was effective while it was still in force and should only be utilised to prevent further erosion of the rule of law and to safeguard national security.
He further said that the NPP Government had plans to repeal the PTA in future, after addressing modern developments in unlawful activities including radicalisation and online hatred, as well as other relevant controversies.
Justice Minister Nanayakkara also announced in Parliament that three bills would be presented soon, namely the Proceeds of Crime Bill; Rescue, Rehabilitation, and Insolvency Bill; and amendments to the Audit Act.
Prof. Gunaratna claimed that a future anti-terror law should take into account three factors, which were online harassment and radicalisation, terrorism financing, and terrorist and extremist rehabilitation. It would then appear that the NPP Government has approached the issue in view of the propositions made by Prof. Gunaratna.
Speaking to The Sunday Morning, Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi (ITAK) MP Shanakiyan Rasamanickam said that the topic of the PTA had been discussed at the meeting with President Dissanayake.
“The President expressed his desire to repeal the PTA, but he also said that it was the only law under which certain offenders could be arrested, owing to the threat of terrorism and increased tensions of racism. It will continue to operate, but in time to come I believe suitable changes will be introduced by the Government. If the Government is serious about human rights, then it should repeal this.”
Archchuna’s controversy
When asked if the recent controversial statements made by MP Dr. Ramanathan Archchuna on the late Leader of the LTTE Velupillai Prabhakaran could lead to an arrest under the PTA, Deputy Minister Watagala declined to comment.
However, Prof. Gunaratna made strong arguments calling for Archchuna’s arrest. “The people are not racist. It is the political leaders who promote racism among the people,” he said, while asserting that high-level leaders ought to face more severe punishment for their contributions to terrorism than ordinary people.
He proposed that laws should target three categories of persons: political leaders who radicalise the community, those who receive funding from LTTE front organisations or affiliated terror support groups, and functionaries who organise events such as the public memorialisation of Maaveerar Naal.
When asked about commemorating the war dead, Prof. Gunaratna stated that every family had a right to commemorate their dead. However, he asserted that commemorating it on a given day suggested by a proscribed terror group in a manner glorifying the acts of the group could lead to a re-emergence of terror threats. He further said that memorialisation must be done in private.
Meanwhile, Arulingam presented another perspective on the matter of commemorating Maaveerar Naal.
“The situation surrounding Maaveerar Naal highlights inconsistencies in the Government’s stance. While it recognises the right to remember the dead, it imposes restrictions such as prohibiting the use of LTTE symbols or photographs. This duality misleads the public, as Maaveerar Naal is primarily a commemoration of LTTE fighters.
“The Government’s actions, arresting individuals for related activities while claiming to uphold rights, reflect confusion or deliberate manipulation to appear liberal while maintaining control,” she said.
Watagala also presented the argument that a gazette from 2011 continued to operate, highlighting what could and could not be done through a performance of memorialisation. He commented that the arrests were a result of violating the gazette.