Tamil National Alliance (TNA) MP M.A. Sumanthiran has observed that the Prevention of Terrorism Act (Temporary Provisions) (PTA) should be repealed, but also that the Government must not re-introduce its provisions in the planned National Security Act, as this would defeat the purpose of repealing the PTA.

“The Government has decided to repeal this Act by bringing in a new Act. We have to be vigilant because we do not need a special Act for this purpose. Through a new Act called the National Security Act, the PTA provisions can be reintorduced. We have to very clearly take a stand and say we do not need another PTA,” asserted Sumanthiran.

The MP stated that the PTA was implemented as the Temporary Provisions Act in 1979, hence its official title that reads Prevention Of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act (No. 48 of 1979), and was made permanent much later.

“It was brought in for a period of six months when former President J.R. Jayewardene ordered Brigadier Bull Weeratunga (Tissa Weeratunga) to put an end to terrorism in the North within six months in 1979. The call to repeal this Act started after the war. There were many allegations levelled against the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna at the time.

Sumanthiran then recalled three cases where he represented three different parties who were tried in court under this Act.

“One case I argued under this Act was for a Tamil couple who knew of a terrorist, but did not report the terrorist to the Police. They knew him and he had stayed in their house. The terrorist was involved in late Admiral Clancy Fernando’s assassination, and they knew him, so they were accused of not reporting him. I represented them in court. The terrorist had been taken into custody as well. They were tortured and finally confessed. The terrorist did not confess, and he was released. He even came to watch the couple’s trial in court. 

“I pointed out in court that the couple was accused of not reporting this man and that a case was not even filed against him. Then the judges told me to proceed on the basis that they were not guilty, but then they would remain in prison for two years without bail and it would have taken five more years to argue. So they pleaded guilty, even though we all knew they were not guilty, and the judge suspended their sentence,” recalled Sumanthiran. 

“Under this Act, guilty parties are given freedom, while other people are made to give confessions to close the case and investigations are also called off. Many incidents like this occurred in the past 40 years. One such case was that of journalist J.S. Tissanayagam who founded a newspaper called the ‘North East Herald, of which only 50 copies were sold. Cases were filed against him after two years of publishing, with the court claiming that his articles could cause unrest amongst the Sinhala people and cause a conflict between ethnicities. 

“Nothing of the sort had even happened before and no one had even read his paper, but he was imprisoned for 20 years. His confession was handwritten by him in Tamil in black ink, and he had stated that someone had offered him money to publish this paper and that he had refused. However, the corrected version of his confession was in blue ink, and it stated that he had agreed to receive money for publishing his paper. 

“He had made many corrections in black ink on the side of the paper with his initials, but these corrections were in blue ink, and they didn’t even have his initials. The court accepted it as a confession and sentenced him for 20 years. 

“Another man I represented named Edward Sivalingam was imprisoned for 16 years. He had a Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) travel pass, which people back then carried with them because they needed it to travel. In English the pass says ‘travel pass’ but in court it was identified as an LTTE identity card. Now, after 16 years, they have released him. Who gives him back 16 years of his life? 

“I met him recently and told him we could file a civil case against the government demanding compensation. He replied that he was not afraid of filing a case, but he did not want to because of the other prisoners who have not yet been released. This is what happens under the PTA,” explained Sumanthiran.

Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena informed Parliament two months ago that the draft bill to repeal the PTA which was initially passed in 1979 and made a permanent law in 1982, has been approved by the Cabinet and that it will be presented to Parliament soon. He also claimed that steps were being taken to release the remaining LTTE detainees and the repealing of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) is in the final stage, as per the demands of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).