• Authorities give conflicting accounts over seized books imported from India
• Writers, civil society warn of threat to freedom of expression
• Customs, ministries fail to clarify criteria for withholding publications
• HRCSL warns action may violate constitutional rights

Conflicting accounts from Sri Lankan authorities over the detention of Tamil-language novels by a Kilinochchi-based author have raised fresh concerns about transparency, regulatory oversight, and freedom of expression in the country’s handling of imported publications.

The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) has raised concerns about the incident. 

The dispute centres on 360 copies of novels by Theepachelvan Piratheepan, which were imported from Chennai, India, and subsequently detained by Sri Lanka Customs in late March. Authorities have reportedly withheld the books on the grounds that they may be “damaging to national harmony” – a justification that has drawn criticism from several writers and civil society groups.

The books have not been released to the author to date.

Concerned civil society groups and authors pointed out that such incidents constituted violations of fundamental rights and freedom of expression, charging that institutions such as the Sri Lanka Customs lacked the expertise and knowledge in the arts to determine whether a publication could harm national harmony. 

They further argued that similar incidents could happen to any artist in the country, and called for a proper mechanism to prevent such occurrences in the future.

The incident

Piratheepan told The Sunday Morning that the books had been seized despite their focus on post-war social realities rather than political advocacy.

“A total of 360 copies of my books, ‘Nadukal’ (novel), ‘Payangaravathiya’ (novel), ‘Cynaide’ (novel), my interview collection ‘Eluthal Nan Yuththam Seykiren,’ and a collection of articles titled ‘Eppothum Enka Irandu Thesankal’ sent from Chennai have been detained by the Customs Department, citing that they may harm national unity. I have never written anything against the unity of the country,” he said. 

“My novels primarily focus on the lives of students, children, and former combatants who were affected by the war.” 

He added that his work aimed to contribute to reconciliation in a society still grappling with the legacy of decades-long conflict. “Through my writing, I strive to make a modest contribution as a creator toward enriching a society that has been deeply affected by war,” he said, noting that some of his works had been translated into Sinhala and had readership across ethnic lines. 

Piratheepan said he had written to Minister of Buddhasasana, Religious and Cultural Affairs Hiniduma Sunil Senevi seeking intervention, but had yet to receive a response. He said the Minister had been informed in writing on 30 March, and had promised prompt action. 

The books are being held on the grounds that they obstruct peace in Sri Lanka and could only be released with permission from the Defence and Cultural Affairs Ministries, Piratheepan had been told. 

He said that he had written to the Minister again but had been asked on 2 April to remain patient. However, he had received no update from the authorities as of 9 April. 

Several of Piratheepan’s books have been translated into Sinhala. One of the detained books, ‘Nadukal,’ has been translated as ‘Smaraka Shilavatha’ (‘Story of Stone Monuments’). 

Speaking of a similar experience, Antonythasan Jesuthasan, a writer and actor known by the pseudonym Shobasakthi, said copies of one of his books, ‘1990: Leidenthivu – Mandaithivu Massacres and Mass Graves,’ sent from Chennai in late 2025, had also been detained by authorities. 

“The copies were sent from Chennai by my publisher to poet Karunakaran’s address in Kilinochchi. However, those copies were detained by the Customs Department at the Jaffna Post Office in November 2025. The Customs Department informed Karunakaran that they had been forwarded to the Defence Ministry. The books have not been handed over to Karunakaran to date,” he said, adding that complaints made to political representatives had yielded no results. 

“Poet Karunakaran has complained to Jaffna District National People’s Power (NPP) MP Rajeevan regarding this, to no avail,” he said. 

It is reported that printing work in the Northern and Eastern Provinces is mostly sent to India due to cost-related reasons, as printing costs are relatively lower in India than in Sri Lanka.

Conflicting statements from authorities

When contacted, the relevant authorities provided conflicting responses to questions raised regarding the incident. None provided a clear standard procedure for detaining literature at Customs or clarified what had occurred in this particular case, leaving the public in the dark. 

A senior Customs official defended the department’s procedures, saying decisions to withhold books and films were made under standard regulatory processes.

Customs Spokesperson Chandana Punchihewa said he was not familiar with the specific case but outlined the general mechanism. “It is not a matter of knowing the language,” he said. “If materials are suspected of containing content sensitive to religious teachings or ethnic harmony, they are referred to the Ministry of Cultural Affairs for expert review.”

He said specialised committees, including those dealing with Islamic and Christian affairs, assessed such materials and provided recommendations before clearance is granted. However, when asked whether all Tamil-language publications were subject to such scrutiny or what criteria triggered such referrals, the spokesperson did not provide a clear explanation.

“It’s not about staff knowing the language. If it is a religious book, we cannot determine whether those teachings align with the basic tenets of that religion. Therefore, we refer it to the relevant committees under the Ministry of Cultural Affairs,” he said.

He further explained that this procedure applied to any content, including books or films that could potentially harm religious teachings or cause friction between communities. According to him, Customs acts only after receiving feedback or clearance from these specialised committees.

In contrast, the Ministry of Buddhasasana, Religious and Cultural Affairs denied that it routinely reviewed general literary works. Ministry Secretary W.P. Senadheera said the institution’s mandate was limited to religious publications. “Yes, we are intervening to get Piratheepan’s books released, but it is not under our power,” he said. “Such general books are not sent to us. That has never happened.”

Senadheera said the ministry only dealt with religious texts, citing a recent instance involving Tamil translations of the Quran imported from Saudi Arabia as an example. He added that he was not aware of specific steps being taken by the Minister to resolve the issue.

The Arts Council of Sri Lanka (ASCL), meanwhile, issued a statement following the incident stating that the Cultural Affairs Ministry was intervening and that the subject Minister had been personally involved.

The statement acknowledged organisational issues in handling such matters, and assured that a mechanism would be introduced to prevent similar incidents in the future.

However, when contacted by The Sunday Morning, the ASCL said the Minister had intervened but emphasised that Customs retained authority under existing procedures.

“There are no restrictions on freedom of expression in Sri Lanka,” said ASCL Chairperson Keerthi Welisarage. “There is a specific process followed by Customs when handling any product entering the country, whether it is a book or any other item.”

He added that the ASCL had not been formally consulted on the matter and lacked detailed knowledge of the case.

However, none of the authorities confirmed that the books had been sent to the Defence Ministry. The Defence Ministry has not issued a formal statement on the matter so far.

Repeated attempts to contact Minister Sunil Senevi, Deputy Minister Gamagedara Dissanayake, Deputy Minister of Defence Aruna Jayasekara, and Customs Director General Seevali Arukgoda for further clarification were unsuccessful.

Concerns of civil society and authors

The detention of Piratheepan’s publications amounts to a restriction of freedom of speech and expression, the Free Media Movement (FMM) said.

The FMM stated that Sri Lanka Customs had to respond to several key questions regarding its decision to retain the printed works. 

It also raised questions as to who had instructed Customs to detain the publications, whether the content was illegal or posed a threat to national security, and what expertise Customs possessed to assess literary works. 

Regardless of the explanations provided, the FMM maintained that Customs had acted inappropriately, interfering with the author’s right to freedom of expression and the public’s right to information. As a State institution, Customs cannot evade accountability in such matters, it added. 

The FMM condemned the detention as an attempt to impose censorship and curtail freedom of speech and expression. It called on journalists, artists, and stakeholders to act collectively to safeguard creative freedom in all languages. 

Meanwhile, several Sinhala authors also raised concerns, noting that such incidents gravely affected artistic freedom and constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression. They pointed out that if these books had been printed locally, they may not have been subjected to such detention, questioning the logic behind the current approach. 

Author Chulananda Samaranayake, in a Facebook post, said that according to unverified information, the materials had been referred to the Ministries of Defence and Cultural and Religious Affairs for approval prior to release. 

He said differing views had emerged, with some describing the issue as a communication lapse and others as a broader national concern. While acknowledging that Customs is mandated to examine imported publications, he noted that books were often printed abroad due to high local costs. 

He pointed out that Sinhala publications printed overseas had not faced similar restrictions, questioning why Tamil-language works were treated differently. 

Emphasising that Tamil was an official language in Sri Lanka, he warned against repeating past mistakes linked to its marginalisation. He also raised concerns over delays in obtaining clarification, suggesting that a lack of Tamil language proficiency within State institutions may be a contributing factor. 

Samaranayake stressed that freedom of expression was a fundamental right and said the issue had escalated into a wider controversy not by writers, but by the Government. He called on authorities to provide a clear explanation, and urged the Ministry of Cultural Affairs to clarify its stance. 

He added that if the issue was attributed to a communication failure, it reflected continued inequality between Sinhala and Tamil in official communication.

Meanwhile, HRCSL Commissioner Nimal Punchihewa said such actions would constitute a significant infringement of fundamental rights. 

While noting that he could not confirm whether a formal complaint had been lodged, he said the commission had intervened in similar cases previously. 

He clarified that the State may only stop a publication if it was proven to incite communal disharmony or violate constitutional protections. “If a book is detained without such a finding, it goes against constitutional policy,” he said, noting that such actions may violate Article 14 on freedom of expression and Article 12(1) on equality before the law. 

“The issue here is the misuse of power, which results in a human rights violation,” he added.

He encouraged affected individuals to seek redress through the commission, noting that complaints could be formally lodged.