Growing threats to freedom of expression

There are news reports that a complaint has been lodged with the Criminal Investigation Department alleging that Pivithuru Hela Urumaya leader and former MP Udaya Gammanpila made statements intended to create religious tensions over the Anuradhapura Sacred City Development Project.

Gammanpila had said at a press briefing said that the project had approved the construction of underground buildings within the sacred area, potentially threatening the foundations of the stupas and noted that the absence of specific references to Buddhist shrines or ancient shrines in the project could allow other places of worship to be constructed in the area.

For this statement, two men, obviously linked to the Government but in the guise of concerned citizens, have lodged a complaint with the CID alleging his remarks were meant to create religious tensions.

Gammanpila along with MP Dilith Jayaweera and former MP Wimal Weerawansa are also facing contempt of court charges over public remarks made in July during a Satyagraha campaign over the detention of former State Intelligence Service (SIS) Director Suresh Sallay.

They are not the only ones facing police or court action because they expressed views on issues which the Government seems to find uncomfortable. Locking away those with opinions contrary to those of the Government and throwing away the key seems to be the attitude of the rulers hoping that by doing so it can shut out different opinions being expressed. A favourite cover for such actions mostly is the use of the blanket phrase that such comments  ‘cause religious/ethnic tensions’, a claim interpreted to suit those in power.

On top of this, the Government is on way to introduce the Prevention of Organised Crime Bill which will all but be a further hindrance to free expression by citizens and will empower the Police which even without such extraordinary powers has serious questions to answer for its highhanded and arbitrary actions.

Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa is among those who have questioned whether the death of a young man in custody at the Homagama Police marks another step towards Sri Lanka becoming a police State while noting that police were responsible for the safety and well-being of the public.

In a statement he noted that the proposed organised crime bill as well as the anti- terrorism bill  contain provisions which could undermine fundamental rights and the rule of law while restricting freedom of expression, political freedom and the right to peaceful assembly, potentially paving the way for authoritarian, one-party rule.

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and international human rights organisations too have warned of the danger of these bills particularly the one dealing with organised crime. Human Right Watch in a statement this week said that the organised crime bill, in addition to its many dangerous sections, also contains sections that could curtail freedom of expression by making it an offense to publish the name or anything that could identify a victim of crime which placing restrictions are placed on media reporting of court proceedings without court permission.

The ruling NPP is made up of a majority of members of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) or the People’s Liberation Front. It is a Party whose founding members  experienced first hand how laws can be subverted to meet political agendas. Now those who represent the same party are on the destructive path to enacting laws that would go further than any on the statute books to trampling on the fundamental rights of the people of this country enshrined in the constitution.

This is the kind of legislation that people must rally against. In a democracy one must learn to listen to dissenting voices without those who hold contrary views able to express them without the threat of being jailed or facing harassment and intimidation. The JVP may be drawing inspiration from countries with one-party rule, but Sri Lanka has a proud  tradition of upholding  democracy even through the most trying times and it must and will remain that way because political power is fleeting, but people’s power overrides the powers of the temporary custodians of office. Those enacting anti-citizen laws today should bear in mind that these same laws could be used against them one day.