Connect with us

News

Counsel for petitioners stress need for protecting media freedom

Published

on

20A before SC

* 19A adopted without referendum; 20A seeking to replace it needs only 2/3 – lawyers for ministers

By Chitra Weerarathne

Media freedom should be safeguarded in the future. The 19th Amendment protected media freedom. New laws should not obstruct it, Sanjeewa Jayawardene, President’s Counsel yesterday told the Supreme Court.

President’s Counsel Jayawardene appeared for two petitioners. The matter before the Court is the constitutionality of the Bill in reference to Articles 120, 121 of the Constitution.

In Sri Lanka the people were supreme. Unlike in India, where the Constitution was supreme, the counsel argued.

The state media was an instrument of the state unlike the private media, he said.

“The Election Commission is duty bound to hold a free and fair election.”

The State cannot issue guideline on private media, on the time to be allocated to different candidates. In the 19th Amendment Bill, According to the Section 26, the chairmen of the state and private media were made duty bound to comply with guidelines declared as regards, the Counsel said.

In the 19th Amendment Bill, when the people exercised franchise, under clause 4(c), they have to make an intelligent choice. “The state media is controlled. Then the private media could provide information to the reader.”

The media was linked to the exercise of franchise. The private media could help the people select candidates within the scope of truthful publicity, the counsel said. A licence under Rupavahini Corporation Act is needed to publish/ broadcast. But false publicity is not allowed. But it a dangerous to have to be controlled strictly by the state.

“In the 19th Amendment there is no interference in media freedom even in respect of state controlled media,” counsel Sanjeewa Jayawardene said.

Article 4(c) and Article (10) were violated by the 20th Amendment. The 19th Amendment did not violate media freedom. It should be maintained likewise in the future as well, he stressed.

Intervenient petitions were taken for hearing. There were seven of them among them was one by Professor G.L. Peiris, the present Minister of Education and Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva.

President’s Counsel, Gamini Marapana PC, supported the application by Professor G. L. Peiris.

The 17th Amendment was amended by the 19th Amendment because it violated franchise. It was not approved by the people at a referendum. Similarly, all the provisions of the 19th Amendment which is to be amended by the 20th need not be presented to the people at a referendum.

Amendment introduced by a special majority need not necessarily be placed before the people at a referendum to be enacted, he argued.

Chapter (12) of the Constitution explains that certain Amendments could be dealt with without a referendum.

“The provision of our constitution are amendable, according to the 13th Amendment. There need not be a referendum. The Indian Constitution was different to our constitution. A provision in the constitution could be amended by court and Parliament, without a referendum.

“19th Amendment was determined by the Supreme Court. It did not go before the people,” counsel argued.

“It is illogical to say that to remove that amendment you should go before the people.”

Counsel said that former President Maithripala Sirisena had said in public that the 19th Amendment had taken power from the President and that had made the government weak. This has been referred to following the Easter Sunday bomb blasts. The President and the Prime Minister had been pulling in different directions.”

Because of the 19th Amendment the President, who is the commander-in-chief could not be the Defence Minister, the Counsel pointed out.

In several aspects, the President from 1978 Constitution up to 2015 enjoyed greater authority over the Parliament than in France.

Now it may referred back to the 1978 situation with a two-thirds majority in Parliament. In this country there is provision to repeal the entire Constitution unlike in India.

The bench comprised the Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya, Justice Buwanaka Aluwihara Justice, Sisira De Abrew, Justice Priyantha Jayawardene and Justice Vijith K. Malalgoda.

The Attorney General, Dappula De Livera PC, appeared for the state.



News

Women’s T20 World Cup 2026 warm-up: Chamari Athapaththu’s 94 helps Sri Lanka beat Pakistan

Published

on

By

File photo: Chamari Athapaththu top-scored for Sri Lanka (Cricinfo)

Captain Chamari Athapaththu’s 94 helped Sri Lanka chase down 169 with ease against Pakistan. Athapaththu and Vishmi Gunaratne together started strongly, putting up a 159-run stand as Sri Lanka won with eight balls to spare.

With the ball, right-arm seamer Chethana Vimukthi, who was called up as the injured Shashini Gimhani’s replacement. for the T20 World Cup, made an impact for Sri Lanka, finishing with figures of 4 for 31. Vimukthi broke the 60-run stand between openers Muneeba Ali and Gull Feroza, following which Pakistan lost wickets regularly. Captain Fatima Sana top-scored for Pakistan from No. 7 with 37 to push the total past 150. In reply, Sri Lanka made easy work of the chase, with Athapaththu itting five sixes and nine fours in her 56-ball stay.

Scores:

Sri Lanka Women 169 for 1 in 18.4 overs (Chamari Athapaththu 94, Vishmi Gunaratne 63*; Fatima Sana 1-20 ) beat Pakistan Women  168 for 8 in 20 overs (Muneesha Ali 36, Gull Feroza 26. Ayesha Zafar 10, Saira Jabeen 12,  Fatima Sana 37, Aliya Riyaaz 22;  Sugandika Kumari  1-33,  Chethana Vimukthi 4-31, Malki Madara 1-19, Nimasha Meepage 1-16) by nine wickets

(Cricinfo)

Continue Reading

News

Open hearing on coal procurement inquiry set for July first week

Published

on

Open hearing of evidence into alleged irregularities in coal procurement is scheduled to begin in the first week of July, while the Presidential Commission of Inquiry continues recording statements from relevant officials, investigators said.

So far, the Commission has recorded statements from around 40 government officials, including members of procurement committees and other personnel attached to institutions involved in coal-related transactions.

Officials said that, depending on evidence gathered during the ongoing inquiry, statements may also be obtained from former ministers if required.

The Commission has also received 28 complaints in connection with alleged irregularities in coal imports and related procurement processes.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake on April 17 appointed a three-member Presidential Commission of Inquiry under the Special Presidential Commissions of Inquiry Act No. 07 of 1978 to probe alleged malpractice in coal imports and electricity generation since the inception of coal-based power generation up to April 16, 2026.

The Commission is chaired by Supreme Court Justice Gihan Kulatunga, with Court of Appeal Judge Aditya Patabendige and High Court Judge Sanjeewa Somaratne serving as members. Former State Ministry Secretary P.V. Bandulasena acts as Secretary to the Commission.

The inquiry covers alleged procurement irregularities, possible financial losses to the State, import of substandard coal, quality inspection failures, contractual breaches and operational issues in power generation, including whether corrective measures were taken where necessary.

It will also identify responsible political authorities, officials of Sri Lanka Coal Company (Private) Limited and suppliers, while recommending legal or administrative action and measures to prevent future lapses.

Meanwhile, the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) is also preparing to table its report on coal procurement in Parliament, with officials from relevant institutions having been summoned during its proceedings. COPE Chairman MP Dr. Nishantha Samaraweera said audit findings had also been considered, and any matters requiring further investigation would be referred to law enforcement and anti-corruption authorities.

Continue Reading

News

TNA MP calls for complete repeal of PTA

Published

on

Trincomalee District TNA MP Shanakiyan Rasamanickam has submitted a motion to Parliament calling for the immediate repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), arguing that the controversial law has enabled arbitrary detention, torture and the targeting of minority communities for more than four decades.

In his motion, now published in the Addendum to the Order Book of Parliament, the MP urged the Government to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act, No. 48 of 1979, in its entirety and refrain from introducing any replacement legislation containing similar provisions.

Rasamanickam contended that the PTA had been used for over 40 years to facilitate prolonged arbitrary detention and to obtain false confessions through torture. He further alleged that the law had disproportionately affected minority communities and civil society groups.

The motion states that there is no justification for maintaining a permanent counter-terrorism law that grants sweeping powers to the authorities.

The TNA legislator argued that existing legal provisions were sufficient to address security threats, noting that terrorism-related offences could already be prosecuted under the Penal Code.

He also pointed out that the Government retained the power to declare a state of emergency when circumstances warranted extraordinary measures, rendering a permanent anti-terrorism framework unnecessary.

Accordingly, the motion calls on Parliament to resolve that the Government take immediate steps to abolish the PTA without replacing it with legislation containing comparable powers.

The Prevention of Terrorism Act, enacted in 1979, has long been the subject of criticism from human rights organisations, civil society groups and international bodies, which have raised concerns over provisions relating to detention without trial and safeguards against abuse.

Continue Reading

Trending