Opinion
Endorsement of an LGBTIQ initiative unconstitutional and therefore unlawful
On 9 September 2025, the Chairman of the Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority (SLTDA) and the Sri Lanka Tourism Promotion Bureau (SLTPB) formally endorsed a project spearheaded by EQUAL GROUND (apparently an NGO) to promote and develop LGBTIQ tourism in Sri Lanka. In this letter, titled “Endorsement of the Project on Promoting and Developing LGBTIQ Tourism in Sri Lanka“, the Chairman not only recognised this initiative, but also granted authority to coordinate with the tourism industry of the country.
This endorsement reflects the first state-backed initiative explicitly positioning Sri Lanka as an LGBTIQ-inclusive destination. It sends a strong signal to both domestic and international stakeholders that Sri Lanka is seeking to capture the global “Pink Tourism” market.
Commitments
In his letter, the Chairman endorsed the initiative of EQUAL GROUND and acknowledged the purported value of promoting LGBTQ tourism through Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DE&I) programs.
He granted authority to coordinate with tour operators, hotels, training institutes, guides, and drivers to implement the proposed training and awareness programmes. The Chairman further recognised the project as having the potential to diversify Sri Lanka’s tourism markets and to contribute to the expansion of the country’s global tourism footprint.
He has expressed willingness to facilitate and present the programme to the President, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Minister of Tourism and Foreign Employment in order to ensure state-level recognition.
Government Policy
This letter cannot be viewed in isolation. It is a policy pronouncement of the Government, since the SLTDA and SLTPB are state entities under the Ministry of Tourism and Foreign Employment. By empowering EQUAL GROUND to lead on LGBTIQ tourism engagement, the letter reflects an official policy stance that LGBTIQ recognition and promotion are part of Sri Lanka’s tourism development strategy.
The Constitutional Barrier
However, this policy shift and the endorsement of an LGBTIQ initiative is unconstitutional and therefore unlawful. This constitutional inconsistency was proclaimed by the Supreme Court (comprising P. Padman Surasena J (CJ), Yasantha Kodagoda PC J, and Kumudini Wickremasinghe J) in the Special Determination on the Gender Equality Bill (2024). In that case, the Court explicitly held that the Constitution recognises equality only on the basis of “sex” (male and female), and not on “gender” or “gender identity.”
Supreme Court Determination
The Bill titled “Gender Equality Act, No. of 2024” was gazetted on 10 April 2024 and placed on the Order Paper of Parliament on 7 May 2024. Two petitions were filed under Article 120 read with 121 of the Constitution challenging the Bill’s constitutionality.
Intervenient Petitioners (activists and NGOs) later sought to support the Bill, but their petition was dismissed as time-barred.
Key Constitutional Issues Considered Article 12 – Equality:
The Court distinguished between “sex” (biological male/female) and “gender identity” (socially constructed roles/identities). The following passages are cited from the judgment, which illustrate the reasons for the decision:
“In the course of the hearing, it was common ground between the learned President’s Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Deputy Solicitor General that the word ‘sex’ appearing in Article 12(2) of the Constitution and the word ‘gender’ appearing in many places in the Bill are not the same. Mr. Canishka Witharana, appearing for the Petitioners in SC SD 55/2024, relied on the definitions of those two words contained in Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary and Thesaurus to show this difference. It is worthwhile reproducing those definitions from the said source. The definition for ‘sex’ is given below.
Sex
– either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male, especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures.
The learned Deputy Solicitor General similarly cited a definition for ‘sex’ from Black’s Law Dictionary (2nd Edn):
Sex
– ‘The distinction between male and female; or the property or character by which an animal is male or female.’
Thus, the above definitions provided by both the Petitioners as well as the learned Deputy Solicitor General convince us that any person’s sex has to be either male or female and not any other. Moreover, since the definition refers to the reproductive organs and structures as a basis of distinction, I am also convinced that this categorisation of persons is based upon a biological criterion.
On the other hand, the phrase gender identity, according to Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, refers to a person’s internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female, or neither male nor female. The same source has expressed the view that gender expression refers to the physical and behavioral manifestations of one’s gender identity.”
The Court also held:
“Therefore, I am also convinced that the phrase gender identity is a category different from the categories of male or female. Therefore, I am also convinced that there can be only two components under the term ‘sex’. Those components are firstly the category of male and secondly the category of female. I, therefore, hold that gender identity is a phrase that denotes a distinct standalone category that is different to the category identified as sex in Article 12(2) of the Constitution.”
Gender identity – a new category:
Gender or gender identity denotes persons who identify with categories other than male or female. Such categories are commonly represented under the acronym LGBTQ+, referring to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, and other related identities. However, under the Constitution, no recognition can be accorded to these categories beyond the constitutionally recognised classifications of persons as either male or female.
Gender equality:
The Chairman’s letter was very specific in supporting “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DE&I)” programs. Taken literally, such programs may be structured to promote and assure “gender equality.” Clause 3 of the Gender Equality Bill stated that “every person shall have the right to gender equality and no person shall be denied such right.”
However, the Court held that:
“…our Constitution does not recognize the presence of gender equality. The Constitution only recognizes that no person can be discriminated against on the basis of sex. The framers of the Constitution, in their wisdom, deliberately left out recognizing gender equality.”
National Policy:
The Bill referred to a National Policy on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment. The Court held that, without incorporating it into the Bill or specifying its content, the policy remained uncertain and external. Such policies cannot be given the force of law, and reliance on them amounts to arbitrariness. In this light, the Chairman’s letter appears to have created a similar unlawful policy framework, which cannot be validly implemented.
Buddhism – Religion:
Tourism in the country must be promoted without tarnishing traditions, culture, and religious practices and beliefs. State and state officials are bound to adhere to Article 9 of the Constitution, which requires the protection and fostering of the Buddha Sasana.
The Court held that a Gender Equality law would compel religious institutions such as Pirivenas, Buddhist Universities, Churches, Mosques, and Convents to admit persons regardless of sex/gender identity. Promoting LGBTQ practices would also undermine Buddhism’s foremost place and the freedom of religion and practice (Articles 10 and 14(1)(e)).
Same-Sex Marriages and Cultural Impact:
The Court warned that giving recognition to gender equality could open the door for same-sex marriage claims, which are contrary to existing marriage laws (Marriage Registration Ordinance, Kandyan Marriage & Divorce Act, Muslim Marriages Act, Tesawalamai), Sri Lanka’s culture, and Penal Code provisions criminalising homosexual acts (Sections 365 and 365A).
Legitimacy Questionable
Every state official, including the Chairman of the SLTDA, assumes office under an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of Sri Lanka. This oath imposes both a legal and moral duty to ensure that all actions, policies, and endorsements remain within constitutional boundaries. When an official acts in contravention of the Constitution, it raises serious questions of accountability and constitutes a potential breach of constitutional duty. By formally endorsing LGBTQ tourism and granting authority for its promotion, the Chairman has acted in deliberate violation of those constitutional limits. Consequently, the legitimacy of the Chairman’s official acts from the moment of such breach of oath becomes open to serious doubt.
Legal Requirements for LGBTQ Recognition
No policy, law, or regulation promoting LGBTQ rights or recognition can be made under the current Constitution without first amending it. Intended laws need a two-thirds majority in Parliament plus approval by the people at a referendum to become valid and enforceable.
by CaniShka
G Witharana
ATToRneY-AT-LAw
Opinion
Tribute to a distinguished BOI leader
Mr. Tuli Cooray, former Deputy Director General of the Board of Investment of Sri Lanka (BOI) and former Secretary General of the Joint Apparel Association Forum (JAAF), passed away three months ago, leaving a distinguished legacy of public service and dedication to national economic development.
An alumnus of the University of Colombo, Mr. Cooray graduated with a Special Degree in Economics. He began his career as a Planning Officer at the Ministry of Plan Implementation and later served as an Assistant Director in the Ministry of Finance (Planning Division).
He subsequently joined the Greater Colombo Economic Commission (GCEC), where he rose from Manager to Senior Manager and later Director. During this period, he also served at the Treasury as an Assistant Director. With the transformation of the GCEC into the BOI, he was appointed Executive Director of the Investment Department and later elevated to the position of Deputy Director General.
In recognition of his vast experience and expertise, he was appointed Director General of the Budget Implementation and Policy Coordination Division at the Ministry of Finance and Planning. Following his retirement from government service, he continued to contribute to the national economy through his work with JAAF.
Mr. Cooray was widely respected as a seasoned professional with exceptional expertise in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) and facilitating investor relations. His commitment, leadership, and humane qualities earned him the admiration and affection of colleagues across institutions.
He was also one of the pioneers of the BOI Past Officers’ Association, and his passing is deeply felt by its members. His demise has created a void that is difficult to fill, particularly within the BOI, where his contributions remain invaluable.
Mr. Cooray will be remembered not only for his professional excellence but also for his integrity, humility, and the lasting impact he made on those who had the privilege of working with him.
The BOI Past Officers’ Association
jagathcds@gmail.com
Opinion
When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers
“As a small and open country, Singapore will always be vulnerable to what happens around us. As Lee Kuan Yew used to say: “when elephants fight, the grass suffers, but when elephants make love, the grass also suffers“. Therefore, we must be aware of what is happening around us, and prepare ourselves for changes and surprises.” – Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, during the debate on the President’s Address in Singapore Parliament on 16 May, 2018, commenting on the uncertain external environment during the first Trump Administration.
“When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers”
is a well-known African proverb commonly used in geopolitics to describe smaller nations caught in the crossfire of conflicts between major powers. At the 1981 Commonwealth conference, when Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere quoted this Swahili proverb, the Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew famously retorted, “When elephants make love, the grass suffers, too”. In other words, not only when big powers (such as the US, Russia, EU, China or India) clash, the surrounding “grass” (smaller nations) get “trampled” or suffer collateral damage but even when big powers collaborate or enter into friendly agreements, small nations can still be disadvantaged through unintended consequences of those deals. Since then, Singaporean leaders have often quoted this proverb to highlight the broader reality for smaller states, during great power rivalry and from their alliances. They did this to underline the need to prepare Singapore for challenges stemming from the uncertain external environment and to maintain high resilience against global crises.
Like Singapore, as a small and open country, Sri Lanka too is always vulnerable to what happens around us. Hence, we must be alert to what is happening around us, and be ready not only to face challenges but to explore opportunities.
When Elephants Fight
To begin with, President Trump’s “Operation Epic Fury”.
Did we prepare adequately for changes and surprises that could arise from the deteriorating situation in the Gulf region? For example, the impact the conflict has on the safety and welfare of Sri Lankans living in West Asia or on our petroleum and LNG imports. The situation in the Gulf remains fluid with potential for further escalation, with the possibility of a long-term conflict.
The region, which is the GCC, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Syria and Azerbaijan (I believe exports to Azerbaijan are through Iran), accounts for slightly over $1 billion of our exports. The region is one of the most important markets for tea (US$546 million out of US$1,408 million in 2024. According to some estimates, this could even be higher). As we export mostly low-grown teas to these countries, the impact of the conflict on low-grown tea producers, who are mainly smallholders, would be extremely strong. Then there are other sectors like fruits and vegetables where the impact would be immediate, unless of course exporters manage to divert these perishable products to other markets. If the conflict continues for a few more weeks or months, managing these challenges will be a difficult task for the nation, not simply for the government. It is also necessary to remember the Russia – Ukraine war, now on to its fifth year, and its impact on Sri Lanka’s economy.
Mother of all bad timing
What is more unfortunate is that the Gulf conflict is occurring on top of an already intensifying global trade war. One observer called it the “mother of all bad timing”. The combination is deadly.
Early last year, when President Trump announced his intention to weaponise tariffs and use them as bargaining tools for his geopolitical goals, most observers anticipated that he would mainly use tariffs to limit imports from the countries with which the United States had large trade deficits: China, Mexico, Vietnam, the European Union, Japan and Canada. The main elephants, who export to the United States. But when reciprocal tariffs were declared on 2nd April, some of the highest reciprocal tariffs were on Saint Pierre and Miquelon (50%), a French territory off Canada with a population of 6000 people, and Lesotho (50%), one of the poorest countries in Southern Africa. Sri Lanka was hit with a 44% reciprocal tariff. In dollar terms, Sri Lanka’s goods trade deficit with the United States was very small (US$ 2.9 billion in 2025) when compared to those of China (US$ 295 billion in 2024) or Vietnam (US$ 123 billion in 2024).
Though the adverse impact of US additional ad valorem duty has substantially reduced due to the recent US Supreme Court decision on reciprocal tariffs, the turbulence in the US market would continue for the foreseeable future. The United States of America is the largest market for Sri Lanka and accounts for nearly 25% of our exports. Yet, Sri Lanka’s exports to the United States had remained almost stagnant (around the US $ 3 billion range) during the last ten years, due to the dilution of the competitive advantage of some of our main export products in that market. The continued instability in our largest market, where Sri Lanka is not very competitive, doesn’t bode well for Sri Lanka’s economy.
When Elephants Make Love
In rapidly shifting geopolitical environments, countries use proactive anticipatory diplomacy to minimise the adverse implications from possible disruptions and conflicts. Recently concluded Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations between India and the EU (January 2026) and India and the UK (May 2025) are very good examples for such proactive diplomacy. These negotiations were formally launched in June 2007 and were on the back burner for many years. These were expedited as strategic responses to growing U.S. protectionism. Implementation of these agreements would commence during this year.
When negotiations for a free trade agreement between India and the European Union (which included the United Kingdom) were formally launched, anticipating far-reaching consequences of such an agreement on other developing countries, the Commonwealth Secretariat requested the University of Sussex to undertake a study on a possible implication of such an agreement on other low-income developing countries. The authors of that study had considered the impact of an EU–India Free Trade Agreement on the trade of excluded countries and had underlined, “The SAARC countries are, by a long way, the most vulnerable to negative impacts from the FTA. Their exports are more similar to India’s…. Bangladesh is most exposed in the EU market, followed by Pakistan and Sri Lanka.”
So, now these agreements are finalised; what will be the implications of these FTAs between India and the UK and the EU on Sri Lanka? According to available information, the FTA will be a game-changer for the Indian apparel exporters, as it would provide a nearly ten per cent tariff advantage to them. That would level the playing field for India, vis-à-vis their regional competitors. As a result, apparel exports from India to the UK and the EU are projected to increase significantly by 2030. As the sizes of the EU’s and the UK’s apparel markets are not going to expand proportionately, these growths need to come from the market shares of other main exporters like Sri Lanka.
So, “also, when elephants make love, the grass suffers.”
Impact on Sri Lanka
As a small, export dependent country with limited product and market diversification, Sri Lanka will always be vulnerable to what happens in our main markets. Therefore, we must be aware of what is happening in those markets, and prepare ourselves to face the challenges proactively. Today, amid intense geopolitical conflicts, tensions and tariff shifts, countries adopt high agility and strategic planning. If we look at what our neighbours have been doing in London, Brussels and Tokyo, we can learn some lessons on how to navigate through these turbulences.
(The writer is a retired public servant and can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)
by Gomi Senadhira
Opinion
QR-based fuel quota
The introduction of the QR code–based fuel quota system can be seen as a timely and necessary measure, implemented as part of broader austerity efforts to manage limited fuel resources. In the face of ongoing global fuel instability and economic challenges, such a system is aimed at ensuring equitable distribution and preventing excessive consumption. While it is undeniable that this policy may disrupt the daily routines of certain segments of the population, it is important for citizens to recognize the larger national interest at stake and cooperate with these temporary measures until stability returns to the global fuel market.
At the same time, this initiative presents an important opportunity for the Government to address long-standing gaps in regulatory enforcement. In particular, the implementation of the QR code system could have been strategically linked to the issuance of valid revenue licenses for vehicles. Restricting QR code access only to vehicles that are properly registered and have paid their revenue dues would have helped strengthen compliance and improve state revenue collection.
Available data from the relevant authorities indicate that a significant number of vehicles—especially three-wheelers and motorcycles—continue to operate without valid revenue licences. This represents a substantial loss of income to the State and highlights a weakness in enforcement mechanisms. By integrating the fuel quota system with revenue license verification, the government could have effectively encouraged vehicle owners to regularise their documentation while simultaneously improving fiscal discipline.
In summary, while the QR code fuel system is a commendable step toward managing scarce resources, aligning it with existing regulatory requirements would have amplified its benefits. Such an approach would not only support fuel conservation but also enhance government revenue and promote greater accountability among vehicle owners.
Sariputhra
Colombo 05
-
News5 days agoSenior citizens above 70 years to receive March allowances on Thursday (26)
-
Features2 days agoA World Order in Crisis: War, Power, and Resistance
-
News3 days agoEnergy Minister indicted on corruption charges ahead of no-faith motion against him
-
News4 days agoUS dodges question on AKD’s claim SL denied permission for military aircraft to land
-
Business4 days agoDialog Unveils Dialog Play Mini with Netflix and Apple TV
-
Sports3 days agoSLC to hold EGM in April
-
News5 days agoCEB Engineers warn public to be prepared for power cuts after New Year
-
Business6 days agoPostponement of Sri Lanka Investment Forum 2026
