.jpg)
Several United Nations Special Rapporteurs have issued a joint warning to Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake over the government’s proposed ‘Protection of the State from Terrorism’ Bill, stating that the draft legislation fails to remedy longstanding flaws in the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and falls short of international legal standards.
In a formal communication addressed to the president, the experts stressed that the new draft does not adequately address the core deficiencies in the (PTA) that have long drawn criticism from both domestic and international human rights bodies.
The draft legislation, published by Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Justice and opened for public submissions until 28 February, is intended to replace the PTA. However, UN mandate holders warned that the proposed framework remains “significantly vague and overbroad” and risks enabling both unintended consequences and deliberate abuse.
The communication was jointly issued by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Saul; the Vice-Chair of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Matthew Gillett; the Chair-Rapporteur of the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, Gabriella Citroni; the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences, Morris Tidball-Binz; the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Mary Lawlor; the Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy, Ana Brian Nougrères; and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Alice Jill Edwards.
While acknowledging certain improvements in the draft, including references to the protection of the rule of law and fundamental rights, the experts emphasised that the legislation “does not sufficiently rectify the principal defects of the existing law nor does it fully comply with Sri Lanka’s obligations under international law.”
A central concern relates to the definition of terrorism in Clause 3. Although narrower than that contained in the existing PTA, the experts warned that it remains excessively broad and incompatible with international norms. They stressed that criminal laws must be clearly defined and precise, in line with Article 15(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, so that individuals can understand what conduct constitutes an offence. The current formulation, they warned, risks being used against civil society activists, journalists and political critics.
The UN experts also raised serious concerns regarding freedom of expression. They warned that provisions such as Clause 8(2), when read together with Clause 78, could lead to restrictions that are inconsistent with Article 19 of the Covenant. The legislation’s use of terms such as “encouragement” of terrorism, rather than incitement, was criticised for lowering the threshold for criminal liability. They further cautioned that provisions on the “dissemination of terrorist publications” are so broad that they could be used to prosecute journalists, researchers or activists.
The draft’s provisions on detention and arrest were also heavily criticised. The experts warned that the legislation grants extensive powers to the Sri Lankan police and military to arrest and detain individuals, including provisions allowing military detention for up to 24 hours plus unspecified travel time. They cautioned that such gaps could invite abuse and even facilitate short-term enforced disappearances. The bill also allows for protracted detention of up to two years, including lengthy periods of administrative detention ordered by the executive.
The communication further noted that the draft appears to strip magistrates of the power to release detainees or review the legality of their detention, undermining judicial oversight. The rapporteurs warned that such provisions risk entrenching a “permanent state of militarised emergency”.
Concerns were also raised over surveillance powers, including warrantless searches and interception of communications based on vague thresholds. The experts warned that attempts to compel service providers to grant access to encrypted data would undermine privacy rights. They also highlighted the retention of an “overbroad immunity clause” protecting officials from civil or criminal proceedings for acts done in “good faith”, alongside the absence of effective remedies for victims.
Against this backdrop, the UN experts requested clarification on how the proposed bill complies with international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international refugee law. They also sought assurances that the public consultation process would be inclusive, transparent and meaningful, and that submissions from civil society would be duly considered.
The intervention adds to mounting international and domestic scrutiny over Sri Lanka’s efforts to reform its counter-terrorism framework. Although successive governments have pledged to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act, rights groups have repeatedly warned that replacing it with legislation that reproduces similar sweeping powers will fail to deliver meaningful reform and will continue to enable abuses against Tamils in the North-East.
