In a statement, the TNA said that in the bill placed on the order paper by the minister of justice, the proposed Section 291C is nearly identical to Section 2(1)(h) of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act, No. 48 of 1979 (PTA).

The previous government used this very provision to target persons from the Tamil and Muslim communities and to deprive them of their freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 14(1)(a) of the Constitution, said the TNA.

The release further said that Tamil journalist J.S. Tissainayagam was convicted by the High Court of Colombo and sentenced to 20 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 2(1)(h) of the PTA.

We also recall that Muslim politician Asath Salley was arrested and detained under Section 2(1)(h) of the PTA, it said.

The present government recently co-sponsored Resolution 30/1 adopted at the 30th session of United Nations Human Rights Council, the TNA pointed out. Operative Paragraph 12 of the Resolution refers to the present government’s commitment: ‘to review and repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act, and to replace it with anti-terrorism legislation in accordance with contemporary international best practices’. Section 291C of the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill directly contravenes this commitment, the TNA argued.

If this amendment is made into law, civil society activists warn, it will disrupt the freedom of speech, adding that the existing laws are enough to act against hate speech.

Furthermore, the TNA noted that Sri Lanka is already compliant with international standards with respect to hate speech. Section 3(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act, No. 56 of 2007 provides: ‘No person shall propagate war or advocate national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.’ Section 3(1) of the ICCPR Act reproduces Article 20 of the ICCPR, and is therefore compliant with international standards. The High Court is vested with jurisdiction to try offenders under this Act. The Sri Lankan Supreme Court, in its Advisory Opinion in S.C. Reference No. 1 of 2008, referred to Section 3 of the ICCPR Act in the context of ‘legislative compliance’ with Article 20 of ICCPR. Therefore, there is absolutely no need to introduce new legislation on hate speech, the TNA said.

Civil society activists note that those who engage in hate speech go unpunished not because of any loopholes in the law, but due to selective implementation of the law and due to a lack of political will to enforce the law against those who aid and abet violence and hate speech.