Gnanasara’s right to be despicable

Galaboda Aththe Gnanasara is among the most vile and despicable individuals to have adorned the saffron robe in recent memory. Through years of inflammatory rhetoric and public provocation, he has contributed to deepening mistrust and hostility among communities. His remarks have frequently crossed the boundaries of responsible public discourse and, in the eyes of many Sri Lankans, stained both religion and public life.

Recently, the Court of Appeal upheld a conviction by the Colombo High Court against Gnanasara for making derogatory remarks about Islam and inciting religious hatred. For many who have long opposed him and the extremist politics associated with the Bodu Bala Sena, the verdict may appear overdue. There will be those who take satisfaction in seeing him imprisoned, even if briefly.

Yet the question before a democratic society cannot end with whether Gnanasara deserves punishment. It must also ask whether the legal principles used against him are principles we would trust in the hands of future governments and authorities.

This is where caution becomes necessary. Freedom of expression does not exist to protect agreeable opinions, polite speakers, or enlightened voices. It exists precisely to protect speech that is offensive, unpopular, unsettling, and even repugnant. Once the state acquires broad authority to criminalise speech based on offence or perceived insult, the boundaries of acceptable expression become vulnerable to political interests, public outrage, and selective enforcement.

Recent governments have demonstrated a troubling willingness to weaponise laws designed to enhance the rights of individuals including the freedom of expression and opinion. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act, enacted to fulfil international obligations, has repeatedly been used in ways far removed from preventing genuine incitement to violence. Comedians, poets, writers, and ordinary citizens have found themselves arrested or detained. A woman was once taken into custody after wearing a dress that authorities mistakenly identified as containing a Buddhist symbol. These incidents illustrate how vague or expansive restrictions on speech can become instruments of intimidation rather than protection.

The same laws that make Gnanasara a criminal today may tomorrow be turned against artists, journalists, minorities, dissidents, or critics of those in power. This does not mean hate speech should be tolerated without limit.

Speech that directly incites violence, encourages discrimination, or deliberately mobilises hostility against vulnerable communities can create real-world harm. States have a legitimate interest in intervening in exceptional circumstances. But criminalisation must remain narrow, carefully defined, and subject to rigorous safeguards.

Sri Lanka would benefit from stricter adherence to the Rabat Plan of Action criteria when assessing alleged hate speech. The Rabat framework emphasises context, the status of the speaker, intent, content, extent of dissemination, and the likelihood of resulting harm. This threshold exists to ensure that only the most serious and dangerous forms of expression attract criminal sanction.

Ironically, Gnanasara himself was widely believed to have played a role in inflaming anti-Muslim sentiment, arguably amounting to incitement, surrounding violence in Kalutara in 2014, during which lives were lost. Yet, he was not convicted for direct responsibility in those events. Instead, the conviction that now stands concerns speech offences of a different nature.

That irony should not be ignored. A liberal democracy must be careful not to imprison people simply because they are offensive, contemptible, or politically convenient targets. The defence of free expression becomes meaningful only when extended to those whose speech we most dislike.

Gnanasara has every right to be despised. But if Sri Lanka is to remain committed to democratic values, it must also defend, within carefully defined limits, his right to be despicable.