The current political climate in Sri Lanka has seen the introduction and passing of bills that have the potential to impact society significantly. Since the inauguration of Ranil Wickremesinghe as President, several controversial bills have been introduced in Parliament, including the anti-terrorism bill, anti-corruption bill, central bank bill, and bill on online system security. These bills have garnered significant attention from the public and media alike due to their potential to influence various aspects of society.
Of these bills, the anti-terrorism bill aims to counteract the growing threat of terrorism in Sri Lanka. In contrast, the anti-corruption bill hopes to tackle the rampant corruption within the country’s political system. The central bank bill seeks to reform the country’s central banking system. In contrast, the bill on online system security aims to enhance the security of online platforms and protect against cyber threats.
However, the introduction of these bills has been subject to controversy. The public is wary of potential negative consequences of the bills and protests have erupted in response. The extent of their impact on society is yet to be fully realized and will likely be determined by the outcome of their passing in Parliament.
Precedents
The Anti-Terrorism Bill (ATA) sparked a heated debate in society, with many individuals and groups, including the legal community, social activists, trade unions, political organizations, and university students opposing it. As a result of this opposition, the government ultimately withdrew the bill. The imprisonment of Wasantha Mudalige, the former convenor of the Inter-University Student Union, for over a hundred days added to the fear in society about the Prevention of Terrorism Act, with many accusing the government of using the Act to suppress social activists.
Opposition leader opposes the bill
A new bill, the Security of Online Systems Bill, is being introduced despite various objections raised against it. The government is working to pass it with the majority of votes. Opposition leader Sajith Premadasa has vehemently opposed the bill and mentioned that some of its clauses harm society’s development and existence. However, the government has disregarded the protests and new ideas presented by other groups led by the opposition leader. On the 24th, the government passed the relevant bill with a majority vote.
Government’s opinion
The government has argued that social media must be appropriately regulated to protect women and children who are vulnerable to its negative effects. According to the government, social media is becoming increasingly problematic in Sri Lanka, and a regulatory program is necessary to address these issues. While the idea of regulating social media has merit, some people need to be more convinced of the government’s true intentions in presenting this bill.
The role of social media in recent times
Social media has become a significant source of news, entertainment, current affairs, criticism, debates, and conversations for the academic society. Its unlimited space has attracted a large number of people, and its influence is strongly felt in the field of politics. In Sri Lanka, social media activism played a significant role in the 2015 Maithri-Mahinda presidential election, and it continued to have a strong impact on the 2019 Gotabaya Rajapaksa presidential campaign. However, the most notable occurrence was the solid social media activism that played a part in Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s removal from office during the economic crisis.
The real need of the government
There is widespread public dissatisfaction with the government, and social analysts are concerned about introducing a system for a social media pilot through an act. Criticism of public representatives and their programs is rampant on social media, and the government is aware of this negative sentiment. As a result, the government is being accused of attempting to control unfavourable situations by implementing social media regulation.
Court advises to change 31 sections
Some commentators and lawyers point out that protesting against the recently passed ‘Security of Online Systems’ draft bill is no longer counterproductive. They believe it is essential to discuss the Act and its implementation. Media analyst and commentator Nalaka Gunawardena has noted that the court has suggested that 31 of the 57 sections of the relevant Act need to be passed with amendments. The Supreme Court has stated that if the Act is presented with amendments, it can be passed by a simple majority; however, two-thirds of the Parliament is required if passed without amendments. It remains to be seen whether the adopted document is the same as the court’s original creation until the adopted draft becomes a public document.
Many contradictions
Calculating the number of comments posted on social media daily is challenging. A proposed act would investigate complaints related to situations where individuals share their opinions on social media. A five-member commission would be appointed for this purpose. However, analysts like Nalaka Gunawardena question the practicality of this Act.
Some people are also questioning how global companies that provide services from outside of Sri Lanka can be subject to a law in force in Sri Lanka and be held responsible for their performance. The Asian Alliance of Global Companies has stated to the government that it is not technically feasible to implement the terms of this Act in such a situation. Moreover, this Act is being challenged in international human rights activism.
Nalaka Gunawardena points out that the relevant companies have also informed the government that it is not practical to implement the terms of this Act. Under this Act, there is a situation where the commission does not inquire from the person who made the relevant statement. Relevant investigations can be one-sided, and practical problems arise when interpreting terms such as ‘intention’ and ‘good faith.’ It is impossible to know what is in a person’s mind without psychic consciousness, and how technology makes it understandable is a broad issue in the current discourse.
Lawyers and analysts believe that ambiguous legislation does not contribute to the quality of society. Lawyer Janaka Edirisinghe said that drafting legal clauses with such conditions is likely to create practical problems in society, as seen by institutions such as the law police.
The validity of the Act in the face of legal arguments
Lawyer Janaka Edirisinghe commented on some of the 14 errors mentioned in the Act on the Security of Online Systems. He stated that the articles have both agreeable and problematic areas. For instance, Article 23 on contempt of court and child abuse is universally agreeable. However, lawyers have pointed out issues regarding the attention given to children and women by this Act, which used Section 02 only.
The law on religion-related defamation, which has existed since the 1950s, is still valid today and has drawn attention to the new Act. However, jurists argue that this has created confusion in the interpretation of religion. They believe it can lead to the loss of the right to criticize or correct a wrong matter presented as a religious opinion. This can hinder social discourse on such topics and the opportunity to distinguish between truth and falsehood.
