• Applies to ministries, semi-Govt. bodies, agencies with direct child contact
• 5-year re-evaluation, mental health assessments proposed
• Historic first use of ministerial powers under NCPA Act Section 18
• Limited to State sector; extension to pvt. institutions subject to political approval

“How a society treats its most vulnerable is always the measure of its humanity.” The words, spoken by former Ambassador of the UK Mission to the United Nations (UN) Matthew Rycroft at a 2015 Security Council debate on children and armed conflict, resonate far beyond the chambers of the UN.

In Sri Lanka, they carry particular weight.

Children remain among the most vulnerable in society, yet the systems designed to protect them are under severe strain. Child abuse cases continue to accumulate, with a significant backlog clogging the judicial process. Many complaints remain unresolved for years. For some victims, the path to justice stretches beyond a decade, a delay that highlights deep systemic shortcomings.

Over successive administrations, institutions tasked with safeguarding children, including the Women and Child Affairs Ministry and the National Child Protection Authority (NCPA), have often struggled with limited resources, weak enforcement mechanisms, and inconsistent policy prioritisation due to a lack of sustained political urgency. 

The shortcomings of the State in the protection of children and the weaknesses of the structures involved, including the NCPA, has been well documented.

Meanwhile, perpetrators of child abuse continue to move within communities. In some instances, individuals convicted of offences have been able to secure or retain employment that places them in direct contact with children.

It is against this backdrop that the NCPA is moving to strengthen institutional safeguards against offenders who commit crimes against children, with plans to make the use of a fingerprint-based database mandatory in State recruitment and to explore the feasibility of establishing a fingerprint-based registry at the Sri Lanka Police.

Fingerprint database vetting for State recruitment

The NCPA is moving to operationalise an existing fingerprint-based system under long-standing legislation. Discussions regarding such a mechanism were initiated in 2022.

NCPA Legal Division Head Preethika Sakalasooriya told The Sunday Morning that the mechanism was grounded in the Prevention of Crimes Ordinance, originally enacted in the 1800s and significantly strengthened through a 2017 amendment.

“Through that amendment, offences related to child abuse were made fingerprintable, which they weren’t before,” she explained. 

The amendment brought offences under Sections 286A to 360E within the fingerprintable category. 

These include offences such as obscene publication and exhibition relating to children; causing or procuring children to beg; hiring or employing children to act as procurers for sexual intercourse; trafficking in restricted articles; murder and culpable homicide; causing miscarriage or injury to unborn children; exposure of infants and concealment of births; cruelty to children; voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons; wrongful confinement; sexual harassment; kidnapping and aggravated kidnapping; debt bondage, forced labour, and slavery; recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; procuration; sexual exploitation of children; trafficking; offences relating to adoption; and offences relating to soliciting a child.

Thirteen offences fall within the statutory definition of child abuse, and all were designated as fingerprintable through the 2017 amendment. As a result, individuals convicted of these offences have their fingerprints and basic identifying details recorded by the Police Criminal Records Division (CRD).

“Because the offences are fingerprintable, the CRD at the Police holds the fingerprints. The information collected pertains to those who have become offenders in relation to those 13 offences,” Sakalasooriya said.

The database, previously maintained manually, has now been automated.

“The information of those who committed those offences has been computerised and entered into the system. Previously, it was done manually. Now, the Police has developed it in a way that it can be checked through the system more effectively than before.”

The authority’s immediate objective is to make consultation of this database mandatory during Government recruitment and continued service.

“We are making the use of that database mandatory. This will be a directive issued under the subject Minister’s signature,” Sakalasooriya said.

The legal authority stems from Section 18 of the NCPA Act, which empowers the minister to issue directives to Government departments and institutions. 

Section 18 states: “The minister may on the advice of the authority issue general or special directions to any Government departments or statutory institutions requiring any such department or institution to carry out such acts relating to the prevention of child abuse as are specified in such direction.”

The draft directive has undergone legal review and received the green light from the Attorney General, with the newly appointed Board of Directors also endorsing it. Once issued, the directive will apply to all State departments, semi-Government institutions, boards, authorities, and commissions that work with children.

Under the proposed framework, new recruits will be required to submit Police clearance reports verifying that they have not committed child abuse-related offences. Existing staff members will also be subject to periodic re-evaluation, expected to take place every five years.

In addition, the draft includes a requirement for mental health assessments, to be implemented in coordination with the Ministry of Health.

Discussions are ongoing with the Ministry of Public Administration, Provincial Councils, and Local Government to facilitate system-wide implementation.

Sakalasooriya added that institutional heads would bear responsibility for screening and removing offenders from positions granting access to children.

“No one is indispensable. We want people who won’t harm children to be in jobs that have access to children. Paedophiles try to get into and stay in jobs that give them access to children. There is such a threat, and that’s why we are trying to reduce it.”

Clarifying the scope of the directive, she noted that it would apply only to State institutions. “The NCPA Act’s directives are only applicable to State institutions. It lies with the political authority to extend this mechanism beyond State institutions and apply this to the private sector,” she said.

Addressing concerns about the database itself, Sakalasooriya explained that it remained under Police control and was already shared with courts when required by judicial order. Within the Police, information is accessible across stations for crime prevention purposes.

“The objective of the Prevention of Crimes Ordinance is crime prevention. What is expected from this is to make it stringent. It’s not just for repeat offenders; even if someone has committed an offence just once, they cannot enter the service.”

She reiterated that institutional accountability would be central to the framework. “It is the responsibility of the head of the institution to screen and remove such people and find a replacement,” she said. 

Child protection over rehabilitation

Speaking to The Sunday Morning, NCPA Chairperson and former High Court Judge Preethi Inoka Ranasinghe said that child protection must take precedence over rehabilitation where access to children was concerned.

Responding to queries on a fingerprint-based monitoring system currently under development, Ranasinghe offered a broader perspective shaped by her experience on the bench.

Drawing from years in the High Court, she observed that offenders who targeted children often deliberately sought environments that provided access to them.

“Offenders always try to go to places where there are children. That is their general nature,” she said, noting that ordinary members of the public had no practical way of identifying such individuals without institutional support.

“We are considering this database so that any ordinary person can find out whether someone is an offender,” she said, describing it as an additional protective layer for families and communities.

However, she clarified that juveniles, those under 18 who committed offences, would not be included in any such public system. “They will not be included,” she said, adding that the approach would distinguish between adult offenders and minors within the justice system.

Global practice and policy debate

Sri Lanka’s proposed measures align with broader global practice, although sex offender registries vary widely in structure and accessibility.

According to a report by End Child Prostitution in Asian Tourism (ECPAT) International titled ‘(Child) Sex Offender Registry – Overall Presentation of Different Types of (Child) Sex Offender Registries,’ there is no harmonised global model. Each jurisdiction designs its system according to its legal framework and child protection priorities.

The US was among the earliest adopters of offender registration mechanisms, with state-level systems emerging in the mid-20th century and expanding significantly following federal legislation in the 1990s. Since then, countries including the UK, South Korea, Ireland, Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, and India have introduced various forms of registration systems.

As of September 2022, at least 41 countries, territories, or jurisdictions had enacted legislation governing sex offender registration.

Models differ sharply in accessibility. Some jurisdictions maintain publicly searchable databases, prioritising transparency and community awareness. Others restrict access to law enforcement and judicial authorities, operating controlled disclosure schemes instead.

Open access systems such as those in the US and South Korea maintain publicly searchable databases that allow citizens to identify registered offenders residing in their communities. These models prioritise community awareness and transparency, although they often attract debate regarding privacy and proportionality.

Restricted access systems, including those in the UK and France, limit registry access to authorised agencies. In the UK, the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme operates on a controlled ‘right to ask’ basis, enabling parents or guardians to request specific information from the Police where safeguarding concerns arise, rather than providing blanket public disclosure.

Sex offender registries are frequently established in response to high-profile violent crimes and sustained public pressure for accountability. However, their long-term effectiveness remains a subject of policy and academic debate.

While some stakeholders view registries as essential community protection tools, others argue that they function most effectively as tactical instruments supporting law enforcement investigations, risk management, and inter-agency coordination rather than as standalone mechanisms for preventing recidivism.

Across jurisdictions, the balance between child protection, offender rehabilitation, data protection, and human rights considerations continues to shape the evolution of registry frameworks.

How Police criminal records function

CRD Director SSP Ruwan Kumara clarified that while the Police maintained a comprehensive criminal database, there was currently no specialised separate category within his division for offenders who committed crimes against children.

Regarding the system for tracking criminal records and issuing Police reports, SSP Kumara detailed the operation of an automated information system that has been active since 2016. The system contains the names and details of any individual arrested for any offence.

“When someone applies for a Police report, the first thing the Police does is enter their name and check this database,” he explained, noting that every Police station in the country had access to facilitate these checks.

If the database reveals a past arrest, the nature of the offence determines the next steps. Arrests for minor incidents, such as traffic accidents or drunk driving, do not typically hinder the issuance of a report. However, if a more serious criminal offence is flagged, a thorough review follows.

“If such an offence is found, the Police checks the result of that case before issuing a Police report,” he said.

Additionally, the CRD maintains a database based on fingerprints of individuals convicted by courts. These fingerprints are collected within court premises and forwarded to the CRD to be updated in the system.

While this covers general criminal activity, SSP Kumara reiterated that “specifically, there is no such thing as ‘offenders who commit crimes against children’ as a separate category ” within general criminal records thus far.

Institutional accountability

For Sri Lanka, the NCPA’s current push, if implemented, will be a shift towards more stringent screening and institutional accountability, with child safety positioned firmly at the centre of the framework.

Although Section 18 of the NCPA Act empowers the subject minister to issue directives to State agencies regarding children, it has not previously been invoked in this manner.

“This proposed mechanism is a special step because we haven’t done that before,” Sakalasooriya said. “Therefore, we hope to finalise this within this year.”

Addressing concerns that public disclosure could undermine rehabilitation, the NCPA Chairperson was unequivocal.

“We cannot put children at risk to give them a chance to correct themselves,” she said, adding that individuals seeking reform should pursue employment in sectors that did not involve direct contact with children. “If they need a chance to reform, they can go and work in other institutions.”