News
MPLRAG accuses Muslim MPs of stonewalling reforms to protect the rights of their women and children
Muslim Personal Law Reforms Action Group (MPLRAG) on Friday (14) alleged that Muslim MPs continued to thwart attempts made to amend the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act (MMDA) to protect the rights of women and children.
MPLRAG said in a letter dated 8 June 2023, 18 Muslim MPs had submitted recommendations in response to the Draft Bill on MMDA Reforms to Minister of Justice Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe.
Issuing a press release, it said, “The MPs’ recommendations categorically oppose all progressive reform reflected in the draft Bill, presented by the Ministry of Justice, based on the recent report of the 2021 Advisory Committee on MMDA Reforms. They even regress on progressive positions that were unanimously agreed on by all members of the previous 2009 committee headed by Justice Saleem Marsoof,” MPLRAG said.
The signatories to the MPs’ letter were A. H. M. Fowzie, Rishad Bathiudeen, Kabir Hashim, A. L. M. Athaulla, Naseer Ahamed, M.S. Thowfeek, Ishak Rahuman, Imtiaz Bakeer Markar, S.M. Marikkar, Marjan Faleel, A. H. M. Abdul Haleem, K. Cader Masthan, S.M.M. Muszhaaraff, Faizal Cassim, Ali Sabri Raheem, Imran Maharoof and M. Muzzamil.
MPLRAG alleged that the MPs recommend that the bride’s signature on the marriage register to have no value without a male guardian signing, denying women their autonomy.
The MPs have also recommended to maintain the Quazi system without any changes, including criteria and process for appointing Quazis, MPLRAG said.
“Among other recommendations are; exceptions to minimum age of marriage to allow under 18 year-olds to marry; rejection of equal divorce procedures and retaining the current highly discriminatory divorce system and procedures; rejection of new provisions (introduced in the draft Bill) for sharing of matrimonial property and securing the best interests of children; and maintaining the discrimination between different sects and madhabs (schools of jurisprudence) of Muslims in Sri Lanka,” MPLRAG said.
The organization said that there is a lack of consistency in Muslim MPs’ positions and that views expressed in their recent letter directly contradict the positions taken by many of the very same MPs, publicly, on 11 July 2019, in Parliament, when 12 Muslim MPs agreed that 18 would be the minimum age of marriage without exceptions; that the positions of Quazi and marriage registrar be open to Muslim women; that maintenance be decided by the regular courts; and that Quazis would have a minimum professional qualification of Attorney-at-Law.
“The new recommendations also contradict the endorsement by 13 Muslim MPs of the positions submitted by the predominantly male Muslim Civil Society Alliance, including the All Ceylon Jamiyyathul Ulama (ACJU) to the Ministry of Justice, on 18 November 2022. Again, there was agreement that the minimum age of marriage be 18 years that women may be appointed as Quazi, that signature of wali (guardian) be optional, thereby not invalidating a marriage simply because the wali does not sign, and that Quazis have at minimum the qualification of Attorney-at-Law. It appears that the Muslim MPs’ recent change of heart and mind has been facilitated by highly-private, exclusive deliberations that took place between the MPs and the ACJU in June 2023,” MPLRAG said.
They said the extremely conservative and discriminatory positions taken by the Muslim MP signatories undermine decades of work of women activists working under the harshest of conditions to bring to light the serious and harmful injustices that have occurred under the cover of the MMDA.
It also dismisses the work of six state-appointed committees of experts spanning a period of over 60 years. “The failure to respond to the real issues affecting the intimate lives of Muslim citizens is a reflection of narrow political self-interests rather than the wellbeing of Muslim communities. It is a disservice to the representative responsibility the MPs bear, especially to those most affected and suffering injustice, who are still waiting for relief,” MPLRAG said.
News
Showers about 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central, Uva, Southern, North-western, Northern and North-central provinces and in Trincomalee district.
WEATHER FORECAST FOR 11 MAY 2026
Issued at 05.30 a.m. on 11 May 2026 by the Department of Meteorology
The low-level atmospheric disturbance in the vicinity of Sri Lanka is likely to develop into a low-pressure area around the next 36 hours. Therefore, the prevailing showery conditions over the island are expected to continue during the next few days.
Showers or thundershowers will occur at times in most parts of the island and Cloudy skies are expected, under the influence of the aforementioned system. Heavy showers about 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central, Uva, Southern, North-western, Northern and North-central provinces and in Trincomalee district.
The general public is kindly requested to take adequate precautions to minimize damage caused by temporary localized strong winds and lightning during thundershowers.
News
Treasury theft: Speaker’s conduct brought to IPU’s attention: SJB
SJB MP Dayasiri Jayasekera has sought the intervention of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) to pressure the JVP-NPP government to respect the rights of the Opposition.
MP Jayasekera told The Island that they wouldn’t allow the NPP to suppress the truth regarding the theft of Treasury funds amounting to USD 2.5 million. He accused Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremaratne of depriving the Opposition of its legitimate rights, at the behest of the government.
Jayasekera said that the Speaker’s conduct regarding the action taken against Deputy Secretary General of Parliament Chaminda Kularatne, too, had been brought to the notice of IPU and other international associations.
The text of MP Jayasekera’s letter to the Secretary general of IPU: “I respectfully submit this petition seeking the attention and intervention of the Inter-Parliamentary Union concerning a matter affecting parliamentary accountability, the rights of elected representatives, and the proper functioning of constitutional oversight within the Parliament of Sri Lanka.
On 06 May 2026, I Dayasiri Jayasekara MP submitted a formal request to the Hon. Speaker of Parliament seeking permission, under the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act No. 21 of 1953 and Standing Order 29(1), to raise a question of privilege regarding alleged constitutional and parliamentary violations by Mr. Harshana Suriyapperuma, Secretary to the Treasury of Sri Lanka.
The proposed privilege motion raised matters including:
1. Alleged violations of Articles 148, 149, and 150 of the Constitution of Sri Lanka concerning parliamentary control over public finance;
2. Alleged failure to report to Parliament concerning a controversial and unlawful transfer of approximately USD 2.5 million from the Treasury;
3. Alleged non-compliance with parliamentary committee procedures under the Standing Orders of Parliament;
4. Questions relating to constitutional eligibility under Article 91(1)(d)(xiii) of the Constitution concerning dual citizenship and qualification to sit and vote in Parliament;
5. A request that the matter be referred to the Parliamentary Ethics and Privileges Committee established under Standing Order 118.
Despite the seriousness of the constitutional and parliamentary issues raised, the Hon. Speaker declined permission for the privilege issue to be raised in Parliament.
It is respectfully submitted that this refusal has the effect of:
• Preventing an elected Member of Parliament from exercising his parliamentary oversight function;
• Restricting parliamentary scrutiny over matters involving public finance and constitutional accountability;
• Undermining the privileges of Members of Parliament to raise matters of urgent public importance;
• Limiting institutional transparency concerning allegations involving senior state officials.
The right of parliamentarians to raise questions of privilege and matters relating to constitutional governance is an essential component of parliamentary democracy and legislative independence. The refusal to permit even the presentation or preliminary consideration of such a matter raises serious concerns regarding parliamentary accountability mechanisms in Sri Lanka.
Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Inter-Parliamentary Union:
1.Take cognizance of this matter as one affecting the rights and functions of Members of Parliament;
2.Seek clarification from the relevant parliamentary authorities in Sri Lanka regarding the grounds upon which the privilege motion was disallowed;
3.Consider whether the refusal is compatible with internationally recognised principles of parliamentary democracy, accountability, and freedom of parliamentary speech;
4. Encourage the Parliament of Sri Lanka to ensure fair and transparent procedures governing parliamentary privilege motions and constitutional oversight.
I further request that this communication be placed before the appropriate committee or mechanism within the IPU dealing with the rights and duties of parliamentarians.”
News
Navin calls for formal alliance between UNP and SJB
UNP Vice President and Kandy District Leader, Navin Dissanayake, on Saturday, stressed that any proposed merger between the UNP and the SJB must be carried out formally rather than in an ad hoc manner.
Addressing a media briefing in Kandy, Dissanayake said a structured framework was essential to ensure the successful reunification of the two parties ahead of future elections.
“A formal mechanism must be established for the unification of the UNP and the SJB. This process cannot be confined to personal verbal assurances given to suit individual interests. We must build a strong framework to contest future elections as a united force,” he said.
He added that the UNP could only regain political strength by reuniting with factions that had broken away from the party.
Dissanayake also claimed that the Government would be compelled to hold Provincial Council elections amid mounting international and domestic pressure.
“India is exerting pressure to conduct these elections, while the people in the North are also demanding governance under the Provincial Council system. They are awaiting the polls,” he said.
Announcing his own political intentions, Dissanayake said he hoped to contest as the Chief Ministerial candidate for the Central Province at the next Provincial Council election.
“I intend to contest as the Chief Ministerial candidate for the Central Province. Having served as a Governor, I understand the extent of service that can be delivered to the people through a Provincial Council,” he said.
Recalling the history of constitutional devolution, Dissanayake said his late father, Gamini Dissanayake, had played a significant role in the introduction of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka.
by SK Samaranayake
-
News5 days agoMIT expert warns of catastrophic consequences of USD 2.5 mn Treasury heist
-
News7 days agoCJ urged to inquire into AKD’s remarks on May 25 court verdict
-
News2 days agoLanka Port City officials to meet investors in Dubai
-
Editorial5 days agoClean Sri Lanka and dirty politics
-
Opinion7 days agoSecurity, perception, and trust: Sri Lanka’s delicate balancing act
-
Editorial4 days agoThe Vijay factor
-
News3 days agoSLPP expresses concern over death of former SriLankan CEO
-
News6 days agoDevelopment Officer bids Rs. 48 mn for CPC’s V8 at auction
