The Supreme Court (SC) has granted time for the Attorney General (AG) to inform the stance of the President and the Government regarding Fundamental Rights (FRs) petitions filed against a group that includes former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. 

These petitions allege that FRs were violated through the declaration of a state of emergency, the imposition of a curfew, and the blocking of social media for several hours during the start of the ‘aragalaya’ protest movement (that sought the resignation of the then Government led by Rajapaksa and a political system change) in 2022. 

Accordingly, the SC directed the AG to submit, by way of an affidavit, the stance of the respondents, including the current President and the Defence Secretary, on the relevant matters.

This order was issued yesterday (24) when three FR petitions, filed by social activist Rasika Jayakody and others, were taken up for hearing. The petitioners claim that their FRs were infringed when Rajapaksa declared a state of emergency on 1 April 2022, imposed a curfew on 3 April 2022, and blocked social media for several hours on the same day. 

The petitions were heard before a three-Judge bench of the SC comprising Chief Justice (CJ) Preethi Padman Surasena and Justices Achala Wengappuli and K. Priyantha Fernando. 

During the proceedings, Surasena CJ questioned State Counsel Sajith Bandara, who appeared for the AG, as to whether the AG would represent Rajapaksa, who is named as a respondent in the petitions. 

In response, Bandara stated the AG would not appear on behalf of Rajapaksa. Bandara further submitted that the state of emergency had been declared based on reports provided by the intelligence services at the time, and the social media block had been implemented through the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission. 

Representing one of the petitioners, attorney-at-law (AAL) Suren Fernando argued  the social media ban was imposed pursuant to a verbal order issued by the authorities, which he contended was entirely contrary to the law. President’s Counsel M.A. Sumanthiran, appearing for another petitioner, emphasised the importance of the SC delivering a judgment to prevent such actions from recurring in the future. 

AAL Pulasthi Hewamanne, representing another petitioner, submitted that it was necessary to present facts relating to the alleged illegality of the respondents’ conduct. After considering the facts presented, the CJ inquired from Bandara about the Government’s position on the matters raised in the petitions, noting that it is important for the Court to have the Government’s stance placed on the record for the hearing of the case. 

Bandara then sought time to file an affidavit setting out the position of the respondents, including the current President and the current Defence Secretary. Accordingly, the bench directed the AG to submit, within six weeks from yesterday, an affidavit setting out the positions of the President, the Defence Secretary, and the other respondents on the relevant matters. The hearing of the petitions was subsequently postponed until 21 May.