Connect with us

Features

Security and freedom:

Published

on

Minister of Justice Harshana Nanayakkara speaking in Parliament. (File photo)

Counter Terrorism Legislation in Sri Lanka

By Professor
G. L. Peiris
D. Phil. (Oxford), Ph. D. (Sri Lanka);

Rhodes Scholar, Quondam Visiting Fellow of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and London; Former Vice-Chancellor and Emeritus Professor of Law of the University of Colombo.

Civilisations since the dawn of history have engaged in search for the right balance between security and liberty — both elemental needs of society through dramatically changing conditions and priorities.

The Minister of Justice, Mr. Harshana Nanayakkara, announced last week the appointment of a Committee headed by Mr. Rienzie Arsecularatne, PC, to undertake a review of the current law, to assess proposals for reform over the decades and to recommend the content of an appropriate statutory regime.

On the conceptual plane, several approaches are possible.

I. Adequacy of the General Law

It is an arguable proposition that the general law suffices as the framework of an effective apparatus for security, any special legislation being not only unnecessary but harmful.

In the decades prior to 1979, Sri Lanka, without recourse to any special legal regime, was able to withstand crises including a military coup and a widespread insurrection involving armed attacks on police stations lslandwide. In its report of February 2022, the Law Commission of Sri Lanka was emphatic in its insistence that terrorism, in its multiple manifestations, should continue to be dealt with under the general law.

II. A Special Statutory Regime

The Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act, No. 48 of 1979, was enacted experimentally for the brief period of 6 months. Ironically, it has survived for 46 years. An integral part of our legal system today, it has invited harsh condemnation: “It was abused from day one, because the very provisions in the Act are for abuse, not to prevent terrorism.” (Mr. M. A. Sumanthiran, Hansard of 22 March 2022, Column 804).

Negative appraisal of this law has been prompted by generous scope for onslaught on fundamental values of a democratic society. Among the dangers are laxity encouraged in the investigation process, intrigue and corruption among officials of intelligence agencies intent on self-advancement, resort to impunity even to the extent of condoning torture, and alarming use of its provisions against media personnel, civil society activists and others for extraneous purposes.

The criticism is not unfair that the manner of its application contributed to impairment of harmony among ethnic, religious and cultural communities and powerfully impeded the emergence of a national consciousness.

While this was a disastrous consequence domestically, external dimensions have been no less disquieting. These impinge on the nation’s solidarity and stability, collective initiatives towards economic advancement and deep-seated cynicism regarding commitment to universally acknowledged human rights.

This was seen to inflict grave jeopardy on Sr Lanka’s vital interests in the fields of trade, investment and tourism. In Brussels, the continuity of GSP+ benefits, enabling access for the country’s exports to the vast markets of the European Union, came under threat. In Geneva, the Human Rights Council, in contentious proceedings, approved the setting up of a uniquely intrusive mechanism to target the human rights situation in Sri Lanka.

As these circumstances deteriorated, it seemed prudent to focus on the more serious infirmities and to expunge them as a matter of urgency.

III. Enactment of Amending Legislation

This task was undertaken in 2022.As Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time, I presented to Parliament, with the fullest support of the President and the Cabinet, a series of amendments designed to make the law more compliant with a civil and political rights culture.

(i) An egregious weakness of the existing law was the unjustifiably long period of imprisonment consequent on a Detention Order.

There were instances of an interval as long as 6 to 9 months between one date of trial and the next. This was remedied by clear provision that “Every trial under this Act shall be held on a day to day basis” (Section 8). Any departure had to be justified by compelling reasons.

(ii) Flagrant abuse was sought to be controlled by a series of mandatory safeguards which included a certified copy of the detention order being furnished to the Magistrate of the area within 48 hours (Section 3); a non-delegable duty imposed on the Magistrate to visit the detainee at least once a month to ensure absence of torture or maltreatment (Section 13); and provision for a report by a Judicial Medical Officer to be forwarded to the Inspector General of Police and the Attorney-General, with a view to criminal proceedings, where appropriate (Section 6 (ID)).

(iii) In the previous law access to Counsel as a legal entitlement was confined to judicial proceedings (Section 260 of the Criminal Procedure Code). This gap, entailing considerable vulnerability, was filled by explicit provision guaranteeing the right to Counsel during the police interrogation (Section 5).

(iv) In addition to Counsel, communication with family or close relatives was also ensured (Section 5).

(v) Unlike the earlier law which required mandatory remand of a detainee until conclusion of the trial, the amending legislation specifically conferred on the Court of Appeal jurisdiction to enlarge the detainee on bail after 12 months (Section 10).

(vi) There was, as well, a significant expansion of judicial review as a check on arbitrary or capricious administrative action. In contrast with the ouster clause contained in the pre-existing law, the door was explicitly opened to judicial challenge in Fundamental Rights, writs and habeas corpus proceedings (Section 4).

(vii) Power conferred on the Executive to prevent a detainee from making any communication – which had a potentially chilling effect on the media in particular – was not merely whittled down but removed entirely. (Section 7)

(viii) The ambit of protection was appreciably enhanced by widening the definition of “torture” to bring it in line with contemporary developments deriving from international experience (Section 13).

IV. A Necessary Qualification

In presenting these amendments to Parliament, I candidly conceded that the solution proffered was provisional in character, pending overhaul of the entire statutory regime and its replacement by new legislation. This task, daunting in its challenge, was undertaken in collaboration by all relevant Ministries of Government, with active inputs by the Attorney-General, the Defence Secretary, the Inspector General of Police and Heads of the Armed Forces. This work was already under way.

A practical point of view, it seemed, was that the best should not be made the enemy of the good: my plea to colleagues was that a set of amendments, salutary in their impact for the time being, should not be jettisoned in cavalier fashion in pursuit of the ideal.

Parliament enacted the amendments into law by a majority of 86 against 35 votes.

V. The Future Path of Reform

The quest for a more satisfying version of the law was motivated by resolve to deal with the remaining deficiencies.

(a) The most striking of these blemishes was one which violated the very substance of criminal justice by infringing such seminal principles as the constitutionally entrenched presumption of innocence, the privilege against self-incrimination and established rules governing the burden of proof.

The offending provision enabled the reception in evidence of confessions made by a detainee to a police officer not below the rank of an Assistant Superintendent of Police (Section 16 (i)). This introduced the very real danger of wrongful convictions based on coerced confessions.

This indefensible peril, unfortunately, could not be removed because of strong resistance by defence authorities on the ground of overriding security concerns.

(b) Regarding the duration of custody under a detention order, on account of divergence of opinion which could not be reconciled, the maximum reduction which could be effected was from 18 to 12 months — the resulting mitigation still inadequate without proper judicial oversight.

(c) A conflict of jurisdictions brought about the inexcusable anomaly that, even where the Court of Appeal had granted bail, the Hight Court – lower in the judicial hierarchy – continued to be empowered to order remand.

Since these anomalies could not be expunged at the time, I took the initiative, with full concurrence of President Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, to give a solemn undertaking to the Human Rights Council in Geneva in March 2022, that a moratorium would be imposed on use of the PTA until the new, promised legislation comes into effect. It is much to be regretted that this assurance received short shrift after the change of government later that year.

VI. An Aborted Attempt

Based on conviction of the need for a completely new point of departure, a Counter Terrorism Bill was drafted and gazetted in October 2018.

The high watermark of authoritarianism, the repugnant features of the Bill included a grotesquely overbroad definition of terrorism (Section 3); compulsory programmes of rehabilitation as a condition of deferment of indictments (Section 72); authority conferred on the Executive to make ‘Proscription Orders’ incompatible with fundamental rights (Section 81); ‘Restriction Orders’ purporting to prevent, inter alia,”travelling outside the normal route between the place of residence and the place of employment” (Section 82); Orders relating to ‘Prohibited Spaces’ preventing journalists and others from “taking photographs., video recording and making sketches” (Section 84); and such vague criteria as “the impact on peaceful coexistence of the people of Sri Lanka” (Section 87) as factors aggravating the severity of a sentence.

Unsurprisingly, the proposed legislation failed to make any progress towards enactment.

VII. The Way Forward

In his intervention in the Debate in Parliament in March 2022 on the PTA Amendments, the current Foreign Minister, Mr. Vijitha Herath, then speaking from the ranks of the Opposition, strongly advocated wholesale repeal of the PTA, which he characterised as unreservedly evil. This is in line with the announcement a few day ago by the Minister of Justice that the Government is committed to the early enactment of entirely new legislation in place of the existing Act.

A useful word of caution relates to futility of reinventing the wheel. A profusion of material already in existence makes it superfluous to add yet another leaf to the thicket. The Law Commission Report compiled by three eminent President’s Counsel – Mr. Romesh de Silva, Mr. Sanjeewa Jayawardena and Mr. Manohara de Silva – has received less attention than it warrants.

It is vital to appreciate that upgrading and modernising the law is only one component of the overall effort required. No law, however sound, will accomplish its objective unless it is accompanied by an honest attempt to further professionalise the intelligence services and to provide systematic training, access to technology and connectivity with institutions around the world.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

I just wanted to get it stamped: A seven-hour stamp at DIE

Published

on

There is a short story by Gabriel García Márquez, Nobel laureate, master of the human comedy and its agonies, called “I Just Want to Use the Telephone.” A woman breaks down on a Spanish highway, hitches a lift to the nearest town, and simply wants to make a telephone call to tell her husband she will be late. What follows is a Kafkaesque nightmare of misunderstanding, and catastrophic bureaucratic misinterpretation that swallows her whole life. She ends up committed to an asylum. She never makes the call.

Another Nobel laureate, Milan Kundera’s The Joke, in which a Czech student writes a postcard with a harmless witticism, and the machinery of misinterpretation grinds his entire existence to dust. Two writers, two languages, two very different political contexts, and the same essential theme: the terrifying consequences of systems that refuse to think, administered by officials who refuse to listen, imposed on individuals who simply wanted something simple and ordinary.

I thought of both of them, sitting in Room 20 of the Department of Immigration and Emigration (DIE) in Battaramulla, on a perfectly ordinary morning, waiting. I just wanted to get it stamped.

The Stamp

The matter was, on its face, trivially simple. My passport carries an information page stating it is valid until 30 March 2028. It also carries, on the following page, an endorsement, a condition, restricting the passport’s validity to five years, expiring 30 March 2023. This restriction had been imposed, I was informed, because at the time of issuance I did not possess a National Identity Card (NIC) issued by the Department of Registration of Persons (DRP). Once I obtained the NIC, I was told, the condition could be cancelled by a simple further stamp. A straightforward administrative correction. A bureaucratic afterthought.

So, I arrived at the Department of Immigration and Emigration, the DIE, an acronym one cannot help but notice carries its own dark poetry, with the relevant form, the relevant fee, and my NIC. I submitted my application at approximately nine o’clock in the morning. The officer directed me to wait. I waited.

Modern technology is a mercy in such moments. The smartphone, that great time killer, allows us to read, to write, to attend to correspondence, to think. I attended to productive work. The waiting room filled and thinned and filled again around me. The morning gave way to afternoon.

The call came at around four o’clock in the afternoon, a full seven hours, hungry, thirsty, anxious waiting, for a stamp. My NIC had been referred for verification to the DRP which is located in the same building, different floor though, the verification had taken seven hours to travel vertically between floors and return. My passport was finally stamped. The restricting condition was cancelled. I was free to go. Seven hours. One building. Two floors. A stamp.

The Geography of Absurdity

Let us be precise about the geometry of this situation, because precision is what bureaucracy demands of citizens while refusing it for itself.

The information that one department needed from the other, confirmation that a national identity card bearing a specific number belonged to a specific person, is information that both departments already hold, in files, in databases, in the digital records that both institutions have been building for years.

That information was not retrieved electronically. It was not confirmed through an intranet query that would have taken thirty seconds. It was not verified through any of the digital systems that Sri Lanka’s Digital National Strategy 2030 promises to build, or that the World Bank’s $50 million Digital Transformation Project, approved in December 2025, is supposed to finance, or that President Dissanayake, who is himself the minister responsible for digitisation, has repeatedly pledged to accelerate. The information was physically transported, on paper or on foot or through some process that consumed seven hours, between two offices in the same building.

A Retired Banker’s Letter and a Nation’s Pattern

I am not alone in this observation, and I am not the first to make it in print. A well-known retired banker wrote to the letters pages of a national newspaper not long ago with a complaint that has since circulated widely among the professional and business community. His concern was the unnecessary duplication of bureaucratic processes in Sri Lanka’s government agencies, the requirement to submit the same information repeatedly to different departments that have no mechanism for sharing it with each other.

His example was instructive: a company that changes its registered address must deal separately with the Registrar of Companies (RC) and the Inland Revenue Department (IRD), resubmitting information that both institutions already hold. Two forms, two queues, two sets of fees, two sets of officials who will each process the same fact, that the company has moved, in complete ignorance of the other’s proceedings. He contrasted this with South Korea, where customs efficiency and trade facilitation have been systematically modernised, and where single-window processes allow firms to submit information once and have it flow automatically to all relevant authorities.

The contrast is not merely between administrative cultures. It is between two different philosophies of what government is for. In the South Korean conception, and in Singapore’s, and in Estonia’s, and in the many countries that have successfully digitised their public services, government exists to process the citizen’s legitimate needs with minimum friction. In the Sri Lankan conception, as it is actually practised rather than rhetorically proclaimed, the citizen exists to process the government’s requirements, repeatedly, in person, in queues, with multiple original documents, at multiple counters, on multiple occasions, regardless of how many times the same information has already been submitted.

This is not a trivial inconvenience. It is a structural tax on every productive citizen and every legitimate enterprise in the country.

The Rhetoric and the Reality

Digitalisation is, on paper, precisely the intervention that would have prevented my seven-hour wait: a delay that a single intranet query, a database check, or a digital confirmation could have eliminated. The technology is not exotic. The conceptual framework already exists. The international funding is arriving (USD50 Mn from the World Bank). The President has made the speeches.

That lagging did not happen because Sri Lanka lacked talent, the Senior Advisor to the President on Digitalization, Dr. Hans Wijayasuriya, has stated that Sri Lanka already possesses 75% of the necessary skills to build a strong digital economy. It happened because institutional culture, interdepartmental rivalry, and the chronic prioritisation of process over outcome have conspired to keep the citizen in the queue long after the queue should have ceased to exist.

The Innocent and the System

Here is the cruellest feature of the Sri Lankan bureaucratic condition, and the one that García Márquez and Kundera both understood with novelist’s precision: the systems are designed, or have calcified into designs, that punish the innocent for the sins of the guilty.

The five-year restriction on my passport existed because some applicants, in the past, had submitted fraudulent identity documents to obtain passports. The solution was to restrict all passports issued without NIC verification, regardless of the individual applicant’s circumstances, regardless of whether there was any evidence of fraud, regardless of the disproportionate cost imposed on genuine citizens. A few bad actors found a loophole. The system’s response was to close the loophole by inconveniencing everyone else, permanently, until they proved themselves worthy of having the loophole closed in their particular case.

This is the bureaucratic logic that produced the waiting room in Battaramulla. It is also the logic that produced the multiple-submission requirement for company address changes, and the interminable queue at every government counter in every district of the island. The system never trusts the citizen. The citizen must always prove, again and again, what has already been proved. And the cost of that proof, in time, in money, in lost productive hours, in the quiet erosion of civic dignity, is paid not by the officials who designed the system, nor by the fraudsters whose behaviour prompted it, but by the ordinary person who just wanted something simple.

What a Stamp Can Tell You About a Nation

There is a measure used by international organisations to assess the quality of governance in a given country. It asks, among other things, how many days it takes to start a business, how many procedures are required to register property, how many agencies a citizen must visit to accomplish a routine administrative task. Sri Lanka’s scores on these measures have been a source of persistent embarrassment.

The first is genuine inter-agency data sharing, not a pilot project, not a working committee, not a memorandum of understanding that sits unimplemented, but a functioning intranet infrastructure through which the DRP’s identity records are accessible to the DIE, through which the RC’s records are accessible to the IRD, through which the citizen’s information, once submitted anywhere in the system, does not need to be submitted again. The World Bank project promises exactly this. It must be delivered.

The second is a single-window principle applied without exception to all citizen services. If a process requires verification from another agency, that verification is the government’s problem to obtain, not the citizens’. The citizen submits once. The system talks to itself.

The third, and this is the hardest, because it requires not technology but culture, is the genuine subordination of process to outcome. The process exists to serve the citizen’s legitimate need. When it ceases to do so, the process is broken, not the citizen.

García Márquez’s woman never made her telephone call.

Kundera’s student never recovered from his postcard joke.

I got my stamp — eventually.

(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT, Malabe. The views and opinions expressed in this article are personal.)

Continue Reading

Features

Sri Lanka’s vanishing wetlands put elusive otter under growing threat

Published

on

International Eurasian Otter Workshop-Colchester, United Kingdom

The world marked World Otter Day 2026 recently. Conservationists are warning that Sri Lanka’s rapidly disappearing wetlands, polluted waterways and unplanned development are placing increasing pressure on one of the island’s most elusive freshwater predators, the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra).

The species, locally known as “Diya Balla”, is the only otter found in Sri Lanka and is regarded as a key indicator of healthy freshwater ecosystems. Yet despite its ecological importance, experts say the animal remains poorly studied and largely overlooked in national conservation planning.

Naturalist and conservationist Chaminda Jayasekara, who has spent years documenting otters in Sri Lanka, said the species is facing mounting environmental pressures across the island.

Speaking to The Island, Jayasekara said habitat destruction, chemical pollution, road kills, sand mining, and increasing human disturbance are fragmenting the waterways on which otters depend.

“Otters are extremely sensitive animals. When wetlands are degraded or rivers become polluted, they disappear very quickly. Their survival is directly linked to the health of freshwater ecosystems,” he said.

Jayasekara, who specialised in MSc Environmental Management at the University of Hertfordshire, noted that while the species has been recorded across Sri Lanka’s wet zone, dry zone and coastal wetlands, scientific data on population numbers and distribution remain limited.

According to him, the decline of wetlands has become one of the most serious environmental issues facing Sri Lanka. Marshes, mangroves, irrigation tanks and riverine habitats are increasingly being altered by urban expansion, tourism infrastructure, encroachment and agricultural runoff.

He warns that the loss of these habitats not only threatens otters, but also weakens flood control systems, freshwater security and biodiversity resilience at a time when climate-related disasters are becoming more frequent.

Jayasekara said otters play a vital ecological role by helping maintain balanced fish populations and healthy aquatic ecosystems.

“When otters thrive, it tells us the river system is functioning properly. Their presence is a sign that water quality, fish diversity and habitat conditions remain healthy,” he explained.

One of the best-known locations for otter sightings in Sri Lanka is Aranga Pond, within the Horton Plains National Park, where the species has adapted to the island’s cold montane ecosystem.

However, conservationists stress that even protected areas are not immune to broader environmental degradation occurring outside park boundaries.

Jayasekara’s own work on otters gained prominence through long-term conservation efforts at Jetwing Vil Uyana, where a former degraded chena landscape was restored into a functioning wetland ecosystem.

The restored habitat eventually attracted Eurasian otters, fishing cats, grey slender lorises and numerous wetland bird species.

Over 14 years, Jayasekara carried out field observations, camera trapping and awareness programmes involving hotel staff, surrounding schools and local communities.

“What happened at Vil Uyana clearly showed that habitat restoration works. If degraded ecosystems are given time to recover, wildlife can return naturally,” he said.

He added that wetland restoration should become a central component of Sri Lanka’s environmental policy, particularly as climate change intensifies droughts, floods and biodiversity loss.

Chaminda collecting scat for research purposes in Sigiriya

He says wetlands are among the planet’s most productive ecosystems, functioning as natural water filters and carbon sinks while providing breeding grounds for fish, amphibians and aquatic mammals.

Yet globally, wetlands are disappearing at an alarming rate, and Sri Lanka is no exception.

Conservation groups have repeatedly warned that illegal waste disposal, pesticide contamination and poorly planned infrastructure projects are severely affecting freshwater ecosystems throughout the country.

Jayasekara also highlighted the importance of stronger environmental education and community participation in conservation.

“Awareness is still very limited. Many people living close to wetlands do not realise the ecological importance of otters or the threats they face,” he said.

According to him, involving local communities in conservation monitoring is essential if Sri Lanka hopes to safeguard the species in the long term.

He also pointed to the growing international interest in otter conservation.

In November 2025, Jayasekara represented Sri Lanka at the International Eurasian Otter Conservation Workshop held at Colchester Zoo and organised by the International Otter Survival Fund.

The workshop brought together nearly 100 researchers, conservationists and wildlife experts from 33 countries to discuss emerging threats facing Eurasian otter populations.

Jayasekara presented Sri Lanka’s experience under the theme Rewilding Through Hospitality, focusing on how habitat restoration and sustainable tourism practices at Vil Uyana contributed to otter conservation.

“The international response was extremely encouraging. Many delegates were surprised that a tourism property in Sri Lanka had quietly carried out wetland conservation work for more than a decade,” he said.

Discussions at the workshop also examined wider environmental concerns including river pollution, declining fish stocks, illegal killings and habitat fragmentation affecting otter populations across Europe and Asia.

New conservation technologies such as AI-assisted wildlife tracking and environmental DNA surveys were also highlighted as emerging tools for monitoring elusive species.

Jayasekara said Sri Lanka urgently requires more scientific surveys, stronger environmental law enforcement and greater investment in freshwater conservation research.

He warned that unless wetlands and waterways are protected, several lesser-known freshwater species could face severe decline in the coming decades.

Environmentalists say otter conservation should not be viewed in isolation but as part of a broader effort to protect entire freshwater ecosystems that millions of Sri Lankans depend on for drinking water, irrigation and livelihoods.

He further noted that healthy wetlands also strengthen climate resilience by absorbing floodwaters, reducing soil erosion and supporting groundwater recharge.

As Sri Lanka experiences increasingly erratic weather patterns linked to climate change, conservationists argue that protecting wetlands is becoming both an ecological and economic necessity.

Jayasekara believes Sri Lanka still has an opportunity to become a regional example in balancing tourism, biodiversity conservation and habitat restoration.

“The otter teaches us an important lesson,” he said. “If rivers are protected and wetlands are respected, nature has an incredible ability to recover.”

This year’s observance of World Otter Day 2026 is, therefore, serving not only as a celebration of one of the world’s most charismatic mammals, but also as a reminder of the urgent need to conserve the fragile freshwater ecosystems upon which both wildlife and human communities ultimately depend.

Eurasian otter

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Features

Malaiyaha Tamil people: Healing the Oldest Wound of Independence

Published

on

Hands of a Maliayaha tea estate worker

In their Vesak messages this year, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya highlighted the values of reconciliation, coexistence and justice as essential to Sri Lanka’s future. President Dissanayake emphasised that Buddhism’s teachings remain deeply relevant to contemporary society and described Vesak as a symbol of “mutual understanding, unity and coexistence among all communities” and of reconciliation itself. Prime Minister Amarasuriya similarly called for the building of a society in which justice is assured to all irrespective of caste, race or religion. These messages were not merely religious aspirations, they were a direct challenge to the most serious failures in Sri Lanka’s post-independence history. These include the three-decade-long war, its human rights violations and the inability to implement a political solution.

These have been and continue to be the challenges that have prevented Sri Lanka from reaching its full potential. Added to this have been the persistence of social and economic inequalities that continue to marginalise communities at the bottom of the social hierarchy. One of the most enduring examples of such injustice is the experience of the Malaiyaha Tamil community. The scale of the original exclusion is worth understanding clearly. According to the 1946 Census, the Malaiyaha Tamil community numbered approximately 780,600 persons and constituted 11.73 percent of the country’s population making them the second largest ethnic community, larger than the Sri Lankan Tamil community who numbered 733,700 or 11.02 percent of the population at the time

The denial of citizenship and voting rights to the Malaiyaha Tamil community was the first major injustice inflicted on an ethnic minority in post-independence Sri Lanka. The consequences were devastating and long-lasting. A community that had contributed enormously to the country’s economy through its labour on the plantations was excluded from political participation and denied basic rights. This was a political and moral failure that cast a long shadow over the country’s post-independence history. Responsibility for that injustice needs to be shared widely. Political leaders across ethnic lines failed to resist it. The result was the marginalisation of a community whose contribution to national prosperity far exceeded the recognition it received. Today, nearly eight decades later, Sri Lanka has an opportunity to correct that historic wrong but only if economic reform is matched by genuine social inclusion.

Longstanding Grievances

The NPP government has repeatedly acknowledged the need to address the longstanding grievances of the Malaiyaha Tamil people. In its election manifesto, the NPP pledged to improve living conditions in plantation areas, strengthen land and housing rights, ensure equal access to education and public services, and integrate plantation communities more fully into national development. The NPP’s Nuwara Eliya Declaration of 2023 similarly recognised that the plantation community had suffered generations of exclusion and promised measures to address disparities in housing, land ownership, infrastructure, education and economic opportunity. The need for such action is plain to see. While citizenship issues have largely been resolved over time, the socio-economic consequences of decades of exclusion remain deeply entrenched and continue to shape daily life in plantation communities.  A conference organised by the Institute of Social Development to mark International Tea Day on May 21 at the BMICH brought out this and many other salient issues.  Headed by P Muthulingam the organisation has advocated for the rights of the Malaiyaha Tamil people for the past 35 years to be equal citizens who enjoy social and economic justice.

The central problem facing many plantation workers is the low level of income they receive. Daily wages remain among the lowest in the country relative to the difficulty and intensity of the work. Plantation labour continues to depend heavily on methods that have changed little over generations. Productivity remains low compared to competing tea-producing countries — not because workers lack capability, but because sustained investment in their welfare, skills and economic mobility has been withheld. Workers consequently remain trapped in a cycle of low wages and limited economic mobility. Their housing situation compounds these difficulties. Many plantation families continue to live in housing owned either by plantation companies or the state. Lack of secure ownership limits their ability to accumulate assets, access credit or make independent decisions regarding their future. When Cyclone Ditwah damaged plantation housing, it exposed the inability of those living in that housing to access state compensation as they did not own the housing in which they lived.

The problems extend beyond the central highlands. Plantation workers living in private estates and smallholdings in other parts of the country face similar challenges. A recent Amnesty International report documented serious abuses affecting Malaiyaha Tamil workers in private tea estates in the Southern Province.  These include wage withholding, debt dependency, restrictions on movement and intimidation and practices the report argued correspond to internationally recognised indicators of forced labour. These findings are not peripheral. They reveal that the structural exclusion of the Malaiyaha Tamil community is not a relic of the past but an active, ongoing condition. Economic vulnerability and social marginalisation continue to leave many plantation workers without effective protection or access to justice. It is against this backdrop that the government’s recent plantation reform initiative assumes special significance.

Second Phase

The government has announced the second phase of a programme to make underutilised plantation lands and assets available for investment. The objective is to transform underperforming assets into productive enterprises capable of generating employment, attracting investment and revitalising regional economies. The programme seeks to modernise the plantation sector, improve productivity and create new opportunities in tourism, renewable energy and export-oriented industries. These objectives are necessary and welcome. However, economic reform alone will not be sufficient and Sri Lanka’s own history provides the warning. Previous rounds of plantation modernisation pursued productivity gains without addressing the structural disempowerment of the people at the centre of the industry. The result was investment that generated wealth without distributing it.  The workers who produced the wealth were once again treated as labour inputs rather than as beneficiaries. If the current reform follows the same logic, it risks reproducing the same failure.

For reform to succeed, plantation workers must be recognised not merely as a labour force but as stakeholders with rights, aspirations and a legitimate claim to share in the benefits of development. Housing ownership, secure land tenure, quality education, vocational training and entrepreneurship need to be built into the reform process from the outset. The government’s commitments to the Malaiyaha Tamil community therefore need to be incorporated into every stage of the reform process. On the contentious question of land, the government should consider establishing an independent national land commission. Such a body should include respected government officials, professionals and representatives from all ethnic and religious communities. It should review land policy comprehensively, develop transparent principles for allocation and use, ensure fairness in decision making and provide a trusted mechanism for resolving disputes. A credible land commission would help build public confidence that land reforms are being undertaken in the national interest rather than for the benefit of particular groups.

The correction of historic injustices should not be viewed as a concession to one community. It should be understood as an investment in national unity, because societies do not become stronger by maintaining the exclusion of those they have wronged.  On the contrary, they become stronger by ending it. The first great injustice committed against an ethnic minority after independence cannot be undone. But its consequences can be addressed, and doing so would strengthen reconciliation, enhance social cohesion and bring Sri Lanka closer to the vision of a country in which all communities live with equal dignity and equal hope. This is what the Vesak messages of the President and Prime Minister promised. The plantation reform now underway is the moment to make good on that promise not in words alone, but in sustained policy that endures beyond any single government and reaches the people who have waited longest for it.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Trending