Thursday Oct 22, 2026
Thursday Oct 22, 2026
Thursday, 22 October 2026 00:03 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) has recommended that the Prevention of Organised Crime Bill be withdrawn and substantially revised. It said the proposed law is wholly incompatible with the fundamental rights chapter of the Constitution and with international human rights treaties to which Sri Lanka is a party.
The Commission made the recommendation in a letter to the Minister of Justice and National Integration on the Bill, which was published in the Gazette on 6 October, 2026. It described the Bill as potentially more draconian than the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) of 1979.
The Commission accepted that legislation to combat organised crime is needed, provided it fully complies with constitutional and international human rights obligations. However, after reviewing the Bill, it concluded that the draft fell short of both.
A central concern is evidence. The Bill would allow confessions made to police officers not below the rank of Assistant Superintendent of Police to be used as evidence against a person. The Commission said these provisions virtually replicate section 16 of the PTA. It recalled its earlier observations on that section: making confessions to police admissible tends to incentivise torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of persons in custody.
The Commission also questioned the Bill’s detention powers. Police would be able to obtain a detention order from the Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security to detain a suspect ‘who is connected with or concerned in a serious crime’. The Commission expressed deep concern over the inordinate scope of ‘serious crime’, which clause 3 of the Bill defines to include a range of potentially non-serious offences. These include offences connected to forfeiture or penalty under any section of the Customs Ordinance and the import of animals without permits under the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance. They also include infringement of copyright, industrial designs, patents or marks under the Intellectual Property Act, No. 36 of 2003.
The Commission described the Bill’s test for membership of an organised criminal group as extremely broad. The factors include adopting the style of dress, hand signs, language or tattoos used by known members of such a group, and even mere association with known members. As a result, the Commission said, the Bill casts a wide and unreasonable net over Sri Lankan citizens.
The Commission further said the Bill, contrary to article 13(2) of the Constitution, strips the judiciary of its ordinary discretionary powers to decide whether a suspect should be discharged, released on bail or remanded. For example, the Bill compels a Magistrate to remand a suspect or give effect to a detention order. The Commission repeated the recommendation it made on the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill: a judicial officer must at all times have meaningful authority to discharge a suspect or grant bail.
