Connect with us

News

Ex-State Counsel asks govt. to discard Rehabilitation Bill

Published

on

Former lawmaker M.M. Zuhair, PC, who also served as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Iran, has urged the government to discard the proposed Rehabilitation Bill. The former State Counsel argued that the proposed law couldn’t co-exist with fundamental rights provisions, provided for in the Constitution.

The following is the text of the statement: A spate of views have already been placed convincingly before the country by many against the Bureau of Rehabilitation Bill. The Supreme Court, in a welcome determination, within the ambit of its constitutionally limited powers, has struck down the Rehabilitation Bill as being inconsistent ‘as a whole’ with Article 12(1) of the Constitution. Rarely in the past has the Supreme Court indicted any Bill as a whole!

The Supreme Court has also indicated that the inconsistency can be overcome if ‘all references to “ex-combatants”, “violent extremist groups” and “any other group of persons” are deleted from the Bill’ and ‘the Bill is limited to the rehabilitation of drug dependent persons and such other persons as may be identified by law’.

It is now the government’s turn to dump this controversial bill as it cannot exist within a democratic State or co-exist with the citizen’s fundamental rights. The Court and the 12 Petitioners who challenged the bill in eight Petitions have done democratic governance in Sri Lanka a timely service!

The Supreme Court has also examined in detail the several provisions in the Bill and made several determinations, virtually down-rating the draft law and imposing the 2/3rd majority requirement for most provisions. Reading between the lines, the judicial view appears to be: ‘Rehabilitation? Yes! But stick to the convicted drug addicts’!

What is now required is for the much criticised parliamentarians, the political parties and the active sectors of the civil society in the country to follow up the proposed law from other platforms to which the Supreme Court or the Attorney General may not constitutionally venture into.

 It is also the responsibility of the rest of the society to focus on the Bill’s ethical illegitimacy and abort it, notwithstanding the proposed amendments the Supreme Court has carefully determined within its constitutionally limited powers.

For instance the definition of the word “rehabilitation” both in the original Bill, and the Supreme Court’s redefined draft, clearly brings out a national “health” related problem and not a “security” related issue. The redefined draft refers to “the procedures and programmes for rehabilitation, treatment, aftercare and support services that shall be prescribed by regulations, made under this Act”.

Rehabilitation, as proposed in the Bill, can never be the function of the armed forces but must come under the country’s health sector, considering the objectives of rehabilitation as a healthy alternative to harsh punishments. Clause 17 in the Bill gives undefined roles for the armed forces in the Bureau of Rehabilitation, though they may have some role outside the perimeters of the rehabilitation centres. The Supreme Court has determined Clause 17 as being inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution.

Another matter of importance is that the inclusion of ‘ex-combatants’, ‘violent extremist groups’ and ‘other groups…’ has come up for serious criticism in the media, and during the submissions in Court. The Supreme Court has commented on the references to these sectors as being inconsistent with Article 12, excluding only the rehabilitation of drug dependent persons.

The question that the draftsmen ought to have addressed is, should “violent extremists”, ranging from the Police defined ‘Aragalaya extremists’ to violent extremists of all religions, be lumped together with the “drug addicts” for the so called rehabilitation! Who will rehabilitate the Aragalaya activists who had been calling for the accountability of those responsible for the economic bankruptcy of the country? Armed forces? Who will rehabilitate the undefined so called Buddhist, Hindu, Islamic and Christian violent religious extremists, if there be any? The Norwegian brain washed right wing extremists or the armed forces?

Rehabilitation of a defined category of convicted offenders in lieu of imprisonment is no doubt a welcome measure. But the Bill does not provide for any judicial determination, essential pre-requisite for rehabilitation, if fundamental rights are to be protected. The Supreme Court has pointed out that reference for rehabilitation must be through an order made by a Court of competent jurisdiction.

 The Justice Minister must do justice to the drug addicts by bringing their on-going rehabilitations under the Healthy Ministry and by restricting rehabilitation to trained medical personnel and limiting rehabilitation only to Court convicted drug addicts.”



News

Ex-lawmakers group calls for IPU’s intervention to check “irregularities” in Parliament

Published

on

Association of Former Members of Parliament of Sri Lanka has requested the Inter-Parliamentary Union to inquire into, what the group calls, institutional irregularities in Parliament.

The Association cited the decision taken by the Attorney General not to appear for Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremeratne, in a case filed in the Court of Appeal by sacked Deputy Secretary General of Parliament Chaminda Kularatne, to underscore the need for IPU’s intervention.

The following is the text of the letter signed by former JVP MP Premasiri Manage, on behalf of the Association:  We write to Your Excellency on behalf of the Association of Former Members of Parliament of Sri Lanka, an independent body representing former legislators who have served the Parliament of Sri Lanka across successive administrations. The Association is committed to upholding democratic values, parliamentary traditions, institutional integrity, and the rule of law within Sri Lanka’s governance framework. It is with grave concern that we bring to your attention a series of developments that, in our respectful view, seriously undermine parliamentary democracy, administrative fairness, and institutional independence in Sri Lanka.

1. Unlawful Cancellation of Parliamentary Pensions

The present Government of Sri Lanka has, through actions that we consider both unlawful and unethical, cancelled the pension entitlements of former Members of Parliament. This decision appears to have been taken arbitrarily, without adherence to established legal principles, legitimate expectations, or due process, thereby undermining the dignity and security of those who have served in the national legislature.

2. Illegal and Malicious Interdiction of the Deputy Secretary General of Parliament

We wish to draw urgent attention to the interdiction of the Chief of Staff and Deputy Secretary General of Parliament, which raises serious concerns regarding abuse of authority and interference in administrative due process. According to material presently before the Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka (CA/Writ Application No. 109/2026), the interdiction:

• Was imposed through the Parliamentary Staff Advisory Committee (PSAC), which lacks lawful authority to exercise such disciplinary powers, rendering the action ultra vires;

• Was based on a preliminary inquiry conducted without proper legal mandate, thereby invalidating the process from its inception;

• Was not the result of an independent administrative determination, but was carried out following the direct personal intervention and influence of Speaker, Dr. Jagath Wickramaratne;

• Appears to have been driven by personal and retaliatory considerations, amounting to a malicious exercise of authority rather than a lawful disciplinary process.

Importantly, it is also noted that the Attorney General of Sri Lanka has withdrawn from appearing on behalf of the Hon. Speaker in the related proceedings, reportedly in view of serious procedural irregularities associated with the interdiction process. The Speaker has consequently retained private legal counsel. This development strongly indicates that serious legal and procedural defects exist in the interdiction process, further reinforcing concerns regarding its legality and propriety. It is therefore evident that the lawful disciplinary framework vested in the Secretary General of Parliament was bypassed, resulting in a serious violation of the principles of natural justice, institutional independence, and the rule of law.

3. Discrimination and Harassment within Parliamentary Administration

We are also deeply concerned by credible allegations of discrimination and harassment within the parliamentary administrative structure, which, in our respectful view, have arisen as a result of the interference of the present Speaker in the administrative affairs of Parliament, thereby undermining the independence of the parliamentary administration. These concerns include:

• Discriminatory conduct affecting senior officials, including the Deputy Secretary General;

• Harassment and discriminatory treatment of female staff members within Parliament;

• The resignation of one female officer due to such circumstances;

• Confirmed findings of harassment in respect of another female officer attached to the Information Technology Division, as established by a report submitted by a former High Court Judge.

These incidents indicate a disturbing pattern of administrative misconduct and a failure to ensure a safe, independent, and professional working environment within Parliament.

3. Broader Institutional Concerns

The above matters collectively raise serious concerns regarding:

• The erosion of the independence of parliamentary administration;

• Abuse of authority and concentration of power;

• Undermining of due process and established legal frameworks;

• A broader decline in adherence to democratic governance standards.

 Request for Engagement

In light of the foregoing, we respectfully request that the Inter-Parliamentary Union:

1. Intervene and monitor the situation;

2. Call for reports and clarifications from the Speaker and senior parliamentary administration;

3. Facilitate independent review and observation of relevant judicial proceedings;

4. Promote accountability and restoration of institutional integrity within Parliament.

Given the IPU’s distinguished role in safeguarding parliamentary democracy and promoting good governance worldwide, we firmly believe that your timely engagement will contribute significantly to restoring institutional integrity and public confidence in Sri Lanka’s Parliament.

Continue Reading

News

Power and Energy Minister, Ministry Secy resign over coal probe

Published

on

Power and Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody and Ministry Secretary Prof. Udayanga Hemapala have resigned from their posts.According to the President’s Media Division (PMD), the two officials submitted their letters of resignation to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake this afternoon.

The resignations come in the wake of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry appointed to probe possible unlawful activity and financial irregularities in coal procurement and power generation.

The PMD said the decision was taken to ensure that the Commission’s work proceeds without interference or perceived influence from individuals holding office.

Minister Jayakody, in his resignation letter, noted that following the appointment of the Commission, he had requested that investigations into coal imports, since 2009, be referred to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), describing it as part of the government’s anti-corruption mandate.

He added that the inquiry should be conducted independently and without bias, and said his continued presence in office could be perceived as an obstacle to the process.

Prof. Hemapala, in his resignation letter, said his decision was intended to facilitate the commencement of investigations and ensure a transparent and independent process, the PMD said.

The Special Presidential Commission was recently appointed to examine allegations of irregularities in coal imports and electricity generation over a prolonged period and to recommend corrective measures.

Continue Reading

News

President appoints Commission to probe irregularities in coal imports from inception of Norochcholai

Published

on

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake yesterday appointed a Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate alleged irregularities in coal imports and electricity generation, amid concerns over possible financial losses to the State.

The President’s Office said the Commission would examine transactions from the inception of coal-based power generation in Sri Lanka up to April 16, 2026, focusing on operations linked to the CEB-affiliated Lanka Coal Company (Pvt) Ltd., its successors, and private suppliers.

The three-member body is chaired by Supreme Court Justice Gihan Kulatunga, with Court of Appeal Justice Adithya Patabendige and High Court Judge Sanjeewa Somaratne as members. Former Ministry Secretary P.V. Bandulasena has been appointed Secretary to the Commission.

Appointed under the Special Presidential Commissions of Inquiry Act No. 07 of 1978, as amended, the Commission has been mandated to scrutinise procurement procedures, supply chains, quality testing, and operational processes connected to coal imports and utilisation.

The Commission has been tasked with the following mandates:

• To determine whether irregularities or illegal acts occurred in the procurement process for coal imports and to assess any resulting financial loss to the government.

• To investigate whether substandard coal was imported during the relevant period and to examine the entire associated workflow, including procurement, supply, quality testing, operational, and utility processes.

• To ascertain whether electricity generation using imported coal reached the expected levels of efficiency and productivity.

• To investigate whether legal or financial irregularities or illegal acts occurred during the power generation process if substandard coal was indeed utilized.

• To examine whether there were any breaches of expressed terms or conditions in these processes and, if so, whether measures such as withholding payments or other compensatory actions were taken.

• To identify the political authorities, government officials, officers of Lanka Coal Company (Pvt) Ltd, suppliers, or their agents responsible for any such incidents and to recommend future action to be taken against them.

• To propose measures to prevent the recurrence of such alleged malpractices or illegal acts in the future and to ensure proper governance and integrity.

In addition to the above, the Commission will also report on any other alleged malpractices or illegal acts related to coal importation and electricity generation, and recommend preventive measures to address such issues.

Continue Reading

Trending