SJB goes to court over arrest of protestors against quarantine rules

Saturday, 10 July 2021 00:00 -     - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

By Asiri Fernando


The main Opposition party SJB yesterday filed three Fundamental Rights petitions before the Supreme Court on the arrest of protestors under quarantine regulations.

The three petitions were filed by Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) Parliamentarians Ranjith Madduma Bandara, Harshana Rajakaruna and Mayantha Dissanayake.

The MPs had alleged that the Police had used the quarantine regulations issued by the Director-General of Health Services (DGHS) to suppress peaceful freedom of expression and unjustly arrest persons involved in such protests. 

Further, the petitioners state that the ban on protest issued by DGSH infringes on the fundamental rights of the public and is unlawful.

The Inspector-General of Police, the DGHS, the Health Minister, and the Attorney General have been named as the respondents of the petitions.

The legal actions challenging the powers of arrest under the regulations come in the wake of several arrests by the Police of those who were protesting against the proposed Kotelawala National Defence University (KNDU) Bill and oppression of the media.

The matter was also raised in Parliament by Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa and others. Opposition political groups, trade unions and activists have charged that the Police used disproportionate force on the groups that protested peacefully. 

The Opposition MP also questioned why the rule of law was applied differently to supporters of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), with no action taken by the Police against groups that gathered to celebrate the arrival of Basil Rajapaksa to “take oats in Parliament”.

The allegations of abuse of power by the Police were also echoed in the Parliament by Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) Leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake. He questioned why the suspects, once granted bail, were forcibly moved to quarantine centres. MP Dissanayake stated that the JVP will also take legal action against the move.

COMMENTS