Opinion
Proposed Penal Code amendment and threat of promotion of sexual abuse of children – VII

by Kalyananda Tiranagama
Executive Director
Lawyers for Human Rights and Development
(Part VI of this article appeared in The Island of 19 June 2023)
The Bill proposes to repeal these two Sections. If these two sections in the Penal Code are repealed, then anal sex and homosexual conduct (of male or female) in public or private will no longer be an offence. According to the submissions of the Additional Solicitor General, the repeal of the two provisions will not result in any lacuna in the law, placing the children in a vulnerable situation without any protection against sexual abuse, as the remaining provisions – S. 365B and S. 345 – of the Penal Code will provide adequate protection to the children against sexual abuse.
Let us examine S. 365B and S. 345 – of the Penal Code and see whether they can provide adequate protection to the children against sexual abuse, as submitted by the learned ASG.
S. 365B – Grave sexual abuse:
S. 365B (1) Grave sexual abuse is committed by any person who, for sexual gratification, does any act, by the use of his genitals or any other part of the human body or any instrument on any orifice or part of the body of any other person, being an act which does not amount to rape under S. 363, in circumstances falling under any of the following descriptions, that is to say: – (a) without the consent of the other person;
(aa) with or without the consent of the other person when the other person is under sixteen years of age;
(b) with the consent of the other person while such other person was in lawful or unlawful detention or where that consent has been obtained by use of force, or intimidation or threat of detention or by putting such other person in fear of death or hurt;
(c) with the consent of the other person where such consent has been obtained at a time the other person was of unsound mind or was in a state of intoxication induced by alcohol or drugs.
(2) Whoever –
(a) commits grave sexual abuse shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than seven years and not exceeding twenty years and with fine and shall also be ordered to pay compensation of an amount determined by court to the person in respect of whom the offence was committed for injuries caused to such person;
(b) commits grave sexual abuse on any person under 18 years of age (on a person between 16 to 18 years – only if committed without consent) shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than ten years and not exceeding twenty years and with fine and shall also be ordered to pay compensation of an amount determined by court to the person in respect of whom the offence was committed for injuries caused to such person.
Grave sexual abuse dealt with by S. 365B is an act committed by any person, for sexual gratification, using his genitals or any other part of the human body or any instrument on any orifice or part of the body of any other person, being an act which does not amount to rape under S. 363 of the Penal Code.
· Unlike in the case of carnal intercourse against the order of nature and gross indecency, in grave sexual abuse the act itself is not an offence. It becomes an offence only where it is committed (a) with or without consent on a person under 16 years of age; or (b) without consent of the person; or (c) with the consent of the person obtained while such other person was (i) in lawful or unlawful detention or (ii) by use of force, or intimidation or threat of detention or by putting such other person in fear of death or hurt; (iii) with the consent obtained at a time the other person was of unsound mind or was in a state of intoxication induced by alcohol or drugs.
· It is true that, as submitted by the ASG, with regard to any sexual conduct constituting grave sexual abuse, the consent of the child is immaterial where the offence is committed in respect of a child below the age of 16.
· But what about the children in the age group of 16 – 18 years? Are they not children? Are they not entitled to protection by the law against sexual abuse?
· Any person can commit any of the sexual acts mentioned in S. 365B with the consent of any child over 16 years of age.
· S. 365B will not provide any protection to such children and they will be left without any protection and open to abuse.
· Will they get any protection from S. 345 as submitted by the learned ASG. Let us see.
S. 345 – Sexual harassment
S. 345 – Whoever by assault or use of criminal force, sexually harasses another person or by the use of words or actions, causes sexual annoyance or harassment to such other person commits the offence of sexual harassment and shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years or with fine or both, and may also be ordered to pay compensation of an amount determined by court to the person in respect of whom the offence was committed for injuries caused to such person.
Explanation: 1. Unwelcome sexual advances by words or action used by a person in authority in a working place or any other place shall constitute the offence sexual harassment.
2. For the purpose of this section an assault may include any act that does not amount to rape under S. 363.
· From the words used in the Section like assault or use of criminal force, sexual annoyance or harassment, unwelcome sexual advances for describing the offence, it is crystal clear that S. 345 is not intended to deal with cases of consensual sexual conduct.
· From the explanation given it clearly appears that it is intended to deal with a different type of offence;
· Even where an offender is convicted the Court has the discretion to release the offender with only a fine imposed, without any jail sentence imposed.
· From the lenient penalty laid down in the Section it clearly appears that it cannot protect children from being subject to grave crimes like anal sex.
· Children will not get any protection from S. 345 against gross acts of sexual abuse as submitted by the learned ASG.
** While making submissions before the Court, the learned ASG had stated: ‘‘Even if S. 365A is deleted in its entirety, behaving indecently in public can still be addressed under S. 7(1)(b) of the Vagrants Ordinance as well as S. 261 of the Penal Code, without criminalising a person’s sexuality.’’
*** On an analysis of S. 7(1)(b) of the Vagrants Ordinance and S. 261 of the Penal Code, it appears that the submission of the learned ASG is far from the truth.
Vagrants Ord. S. 7(1)(b):
‘any person found committing any act of gross indecency or found behaving with gross indecency, in or about any public place – shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment of either description for a period not exceeding six months, or to a fine not exceeding one hundred rupees, or to both.
S. 261 of the Penal Code:
A person is guilty of a public nuisance who does any act or is guilty of an illegal omission, which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right.
· After S. 365A is repealed, gross indecency will no longer be an offence. There is no definition of gross indecency in any penal law. At present the Police can act under S. 7(1)(b) of the Vagrants Ordinance, arrest and prosecute a person committing any act of gross indecency in any public place because gross indecency is an offence punishable under S. 365A of the Penal Code. After S. 365A is repealed, when gross indecency is no longer an offence, how can the Police arrest and prosecute a person under S. 7(1)(b) of the Vagrants Ordinance?
· The Police may end up as respondents in Fundamental Rights Applications for committing an illegal arrest.
· Vagrants Ordinance is not a law enacted to deal with this type of issues; Vagrants Ordinance was enacted in 1841, to deal with problems created by labourers brought from South India to work temporarily in upcountry plantations, who had run away and taken shelter in various places to escape from being sent back to India after their period of work was over. This Ordinance has been amended 11 times before the Independence in 1948.
· It is an Ordinance enacted to deal with following categories of persons: (a) persons behaving riotously or disorderly in public streets; (b) persons who are deemed idle and disorderly persons; (c) persons who are deemed to be rogues and vagabonds; and (d) persons who are deemed to be incorrigible rogues.
· Having no income whatsoever, women belonging to these categories were soliciting men and engaging in prostitution to earn their living. S. 7 of the Vagrants Ordinance is intended to deal with them:
S. 7(1)(a) – any person in or about any public place soliciting any person for the purpose of the commission of any act of illicit sexual intercourse or indecency, whether with the person soliciting or with any other person, whether specified or not;
(b) any person found committing any act of gross indecency or found behaving with gross indecency, in or about any public place.
·Often these acts were committed in public toilets or other places close to bus stands or railway stations or road sides; this term ‘gross indecency’ is used here to cover all types of sexual acts – vaginal sex, anal sex, oral sex, or any other sexual act.
· Generally, it is under S. 7(1) of the Vagrants Ordinance the Police act for arresting street prostitutes and other women loitering at the bus stands and railway stations at night soliciting men for sexual activities and producing them in Courts.
** S. 261 of the Penal Code appears to be equally inapplicable to cover this situation. Only an act which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to the people in general dwelling in the vicinity or an act which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right amounts to a public nuisance under this Section.
· Display of a person’s sexual orientation will not necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to the public.
· If any person engages in sexual intercourse, anal sex, oral sex or any other sexual act or displaying their sexual organs openly in a public place that may necessarily lead to public annoyance.
· No person in his or her senses will engage in sexual intercourse, anal sex, oral sex or any other sexual act or display their sexual organs openly in a public place.
(To be concluded)
Opinion
What not to do

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana
It is immaterial whether you like him or not but one thing is crystal clear; Donald Trump has shown, very clearly, who is the boss. Surely, presidents of two countries are equal; perhaps, that is the impression Volodymyr Zelensky had when he went to the White House to meet Trump but the hard reality, otherwise, would have dawned on him with his inglorious exit! True, the behaviour of President Trump and VP Vance were hardly praiseworthy but Zelensky did what exactly he should not do. Afterall, he was on a begging mission and beggars cannot be choosers! He behaved like professional beggars in Colombo who throw money back when you give a small amount!!
Despite the risk of belonging to the minority, perhaps of non-Americans, I must say that I quite like Trump and admire him as a straight-talking politician. He keeps to his words; however atrocious they sound! Unfortunately, most critics overlook the fact that what Trump is doing is exactly what he pledged during his election campaign and that the American voters elected him decisively. When he lost to Biden, all political commentators wrote him off, more so because of his refusal to admit defeat and non-condemnation of his supporters who rioted. When he announced his intention to contest, it only evoked pundits’ laughter as they concluded that the Republican Party would never nominate him. Undaunted, Trump got the party to rally round him and won a non-consecutive second term; a feat achieved only once before, by Grover Cleveland around the end of the nineteenth century. His victory, against all predictions, was more decisive as he got more collegiate votes and, even though it does not matter, won the popular vote too which he did not get when he got elected the first term. Even his bitterest critics should accept this fact.
Zelensky was elected the president of Ukraine after the elected pro-Soviet president was deposed by a ‘peoples revolution’ engineered by the EU with the support of USA. After this, the EU attempted to bring Ukraine to NATO, disregarding the Munich agreement which precipitated the Russian invasion. He should have realised that, if not for the air-defence system which Trump authorised for Ukraine during his first term, Russian invasion would have been complete. It may well be that he was not aware as when this happened Zelensky may still have been the comedian acting the part of the president! Very likely, Trump was referring to this when he accused Zelensky of being ungrateful.
Zelensky also should have remembered that he disregarded requests from Trump, after his defeat by Biden, to implicate Biden’s son in some shady deals in Ukraine and that one of the last acts of Biden was to pardon his son and grant immunity to cover the alleged period. Perhaps, actions of the European leaders who embrace him every time they see him, as a long-lost brother, and invitations to address their parliaments has induced an element of the superiority complex in Zelensky that he behaved so combative.
Trump wanted to be the mediator to stop the war and spoke to Putin first. Instead of waiting for Trump to speak to him, egged on by EU leaders Zelensky started criticising Trump for not involving him in the talks. His remark “He should be on our side” demonstrated clearly that Zelensky had not understood the role of a mediator. His lack of political experience was the major reason for the fiasco in the White House and the subsequent actions of Trump clearly showed Zelensky where he stands! PM Starmer and President Macron seem to have given some sensible advice and he seems to be eating humble pie. In the process Trump has ensured that the European nations pay for their defence than piggy-backing on the US, which I am sure would please the American voter. By the way, though Macron talks big about defence France spends less than 2% of GDP. Trump seems vindicated. Of course, Trump could be blamed for being undiplomatic but he can afford to be as he has the upper hand!

Ranil on Al Jazeera
Zelensky has shown what not to do: instead of being diplomatic being aggressive when you need favours! Meanwhile, Ranil has shown what not to do when it comes to TV interviews. God only knows who advised him, and why, for him to go ‘Head to Head’ with Mehdi Hasan on Al-Jazeera. Perhaps, he wanted to broadcast to the world that he was the saviour of Sri Lanka! The experienced politician he is, one would have expected Ranil to realise that he would be questioned about his role in making Sri Lanka bankrupt as well, in addition to raising other issues.
The interview itself was far from head to head; more likely heads to head! It turned out to be an inquisition by Tiger supporters and the only person who spoke sense being Niraj Deva, who demonstrated his maturity by being involved in British and EU politics. The worst was the compere who seems keen to listen his own voice, reminding me of a Sinhala interviewer on a YouTube channel whose interviews I have stopped watching!
Ranil claims, after the interview was broadcast, that it had been heavily edited reduced from a two-hour recording. Surely, despite whatever reason he agreed to, he should have laid ground rules. He could have insisted on unedited broadcast or his approval before broadcast, if it was edited. It was very naïve of Ranil to have walked in to a trap for no gain. Though his performance was not as bad as widely reported, he should have been more composed at the beginning as he turned out to be later. Overall, he gave another opportunity for the Tiger rump and its supporters to bash Sri Lanka, unfortunately.
Medhi Hasan should watch some of David Frost interviews, especially the one with Richard Nixon, and learn how to elicit crucial information in a gentle exploratory manner than shouting with repeated interruptions. He does not seem to think it is necessary to give time for the interviewee to respond to his questions. I will never watch Al-Jazeera’s “Head to Head” again!
Ranil’s best was his parting shot; when asked by Hasan whether he would contest the next presidential election, he said “No, I will retire and watch Al-Jazeera and hope to see you better mannered”!
Opinion
Ajahn Brahm to visit SL in May 2025

The Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka (ABSSL) is pleased to announce that Ajahn Brahm will be visiting Sri Lanka for a short stay in May this year. Many, both Buddhists and non-Buddhists, know him and have listened to his addresses made on earlier visits, including his 2023 public talk at the BMICH, which was attended by over 4,000 people.
Ajahn Brahmavamso, popularly known as Ajahn Brahm, is the Head Abbot of Bodhinyana Monastery in Serpentine, Perth. He was a pupil of the famous Thai forest monk Ajahn Chah, considered the best Theravada meditation teacher in the last century. By his own choice, Ajahn Brahmavamso shortened his name and was extra pleased that the initials represent the major religions of the world. He is renowned world-wide as an outstanding meditation bhikkhu, teacher and instructor, guiding thousands of practitioners.
As in previous visits, Ajahn Brahm’s schedule will be packed with addresses, meetings with senior professionals, business leaders, and researchers. This year, a special session has been included for teenagers and young adults.
The agenda planned for him includes:
·
Public address at the BMICH to all irrespective of religion and age; then to a younger audience.
· Exclusive Leadership Forum for senior professionals and business leaders.
· Forum with academics engaged in research at the Centre for Meditation Research, University of Colombo.
· A week-long meditation retreat for the Ven Sangha and experienced lay meditators.
Public Addresses
The public addresses will be on Sunday, May 18, 2025, from 7:00 am to 11:00 am, at the BMICH Main Hall and Sirimavo Halls; Ajahn Brahm moving from one hall to another so the entire audience sees him. Each hall will be well equipped with audio and video presentation. The first address: The Art of Meaningful Living, is designed for all, age notwithstanding, offering wisdom and practical insights for a fulfilling life. The second: Coping with Life Transitions and Emotional Challenges, is a special session tailored for teens and young adults, addressing key challenges faced by them in today’s fast-paced, competitive world. Both talks will be in English, with concise translation to Sinhala by Ven Damita Thera.
Exclusive Forums
On Saturday, May 17, 2025, two exclusive forums will be held at the BMICH Committee Room, Jasmine Hall. The first such session will be with eighty invited Sri Lankan academics and scientists engaged in research on meditation at the Centre for Meditation Research of the University of Colombo. This will be followed in the evening by an interactive session for a hundred invited senior professionals and business leaders, featuring a talk on leadership followed by a Q&A session.
Meditation Retreat
The most significant item on Ajahn Brahm’s programme will be a week-long meditation retreat at the Barberyn Waves Ayurveda Resort in Weligama. Focus is intended to be on the fifty members of the Ven Sangha. A limited number of experienced lay meditators will also have the opportunity to participate.
Participation & Registration
Those interested in attending the public talks at the BMICH are kindly advised to register at to secure free passes. For further information, please contact the Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka at .
Opinion
Fingers or forks?

We grew up cleaning teeth using ground charcoal readily available in most households as ordinary people used firewood for cooking. Then came a noticeable uplift in our living standards when my father finally gave in to Amma’s constant complaining to buy a kerosene cooker! All siblings were pretty excited even to brag about it to classmates! Charcoal gave way to an Indian pink tooth powder called Gopal coming in packs. Notwithstanding the “primitive” stuff, our culture stressed the importance of oral hygiene! It meant just cleaning your teeth itself wasn’t good enough – cleaning your tongue was just as important! I recall my father asking to look into his mouth whether tongue was clean enough after almost making himself sick constantly poking his fingers in the process!
White people are not accustomed to it! No one in the family would be allowed the customary morning cup of black coffee until we have been put through the ablution! Having milk in coffee became possible when Milk Board opened a stall opposite Moratuwa Railway station which meant me trek a good five miles to fetch a bottle! It was 55 cents! All these rituals were in sharp contrast to British culture – cup of tea or coffee is given priority over oral hygiene! I still look down upon this habit though keep my opinion to myself.
After half a century of living in the U.K., I admit to using knife and fork as a force of habit now, though white people think using your fingers is “filthy”! Well, if you cannot trust your own fingers for cleanliness and hygiene as opposed to cutlery, there is something wrong somewhere in your logic!
In all fairness to British strict table etiquette, you are not supposed to talk while eating! More to the point, it’s common sense – we could spit unintentionally especially if we have gaps in our teeth! I am no exception. Also, you should not leave the table until everyone has finished. If you must, excuse yourself.
Something totally hilarious and very embarrassing happened to me in the Majestic shopping mall in Colombo long time ago – my wife and daughter were still enjoying the food when I had to excuse myself to go into the washroom mainly to rinse my mouth as I have gaps in my teeth. There was a row of wash hand basins and a “long mirror” I presumed above.
So, I was busy looking myself in the “mirror” mouth wide open. My wife and daughter not least others were shocked and hugely embarrassed! Not to me as I thought it was simply a reflection from the “mirror”. Need I say walking back to the table wasn’t fun!
Reverting back to Suddhas ways, it is not uncommon to see them giving their dinner plates with leftovers to the pet dogs to finish it off! All these in sharp contrast to their customs saying “Oh, pardon me when you sneeze”, and you are supposed to “Bless you!” Anyway, let me conclude on a happier note, Cheers! Bacchus was the Roman god of wine, fertility, and revelry! My mother enjoyed Southern comfort during our regular visits, saying “Comfort, comfort!”
Saturday 08th March marked our beloved Amma’s death anniversary! May she attain Nibbana! She visited us in UK three times, my father did so twice.
Sunil Dharmabandhu
Wales, UK
-
News5 days ago
Private tuition, etc., for O/L students suspended until the end of exam
-
Features6 days ago
Shyam Selvadurai and his exploration of Yasodhara’s story
-
Editorial7 days ago
Cooking oil frauds
-
Editorial4 days ago
Ranil roasted in London
-
Latest News4 days ago
S. Thomas’ beat Royal by five wickets in the 146th Battle of the Blues
-
News5 days ago
Teachers’ union calls for action against late-night WhatsApp homework
-
Sports7 days ago
Royal favourites at the 146th Battle of the Blues
-
Editorial6 days ago
Heroes and villains