Sri Lanka is expanding its controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act to create rehabilitation centres for religious extremists as a way of combating terrorism. Critics are raising concerns that these centres may be used to facilitate human rights abuses, particularly against Sri Lanka’s minority Muslim population.

THE PERMANENCE OF SRI LANKA’S PREVENTION OF TERRORISM ACT 1979

At its conception, the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) 1979 was intended to be a temporary means of addressing the civil war between the government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Tamil Tigers). The Tamil Tigers were a terrorist group that sought to establish an independent Tamil state. Their views were considered extremist, defined as the “advocacy of extreme measures or views”. More than 40 years on, the Tamil Tigers are no longer a threat and yet the PTA has become a permanent feature of the Sri Lankan lawbook.

Among other controversial provisions, the PTA makes lawful the detention of suspects for up to 18 months with no charge; and gives the Minister of Defence the power to restrict freedom of association and expression without the possibility of appeal. These powers can result in human rights violations as they bypass the need for trials or legal reasons to justify the detention of individuals. This allows police and government officials to use the PTA for whatever means they please – not just counterterrorism. In the same vein, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counterterrorism found that the PTA facilitates arbitrary detention, the suppression of dissent and torture.

In 2015, the then-Sri Lankan President committed to review and replace the PTA through the United Nations Human Rights Council. However, the new government only seems interested in expanding the PTA’s scope. Just last March new regulations were enacted allowing for individuals suspected of causing “religious, racial or communal disharmony” to be sent to military-controlled rehabilitation centres for up to two years. Under the regulations, religious or racial extremist views may be inferred from spoken word, written texts, or visual representations, which leaves a wide scope for interpretation. Individuals can be referred to these rehabilitation centres, without trial, by the police, military or anyone authorised by the President.

MINORITY MUSLIM POPULATION THREATENED BY MILITARY-CONTROLLED REHABILITATION CENTRES

The rehabilitation centres are intended to eliminate the radical thinking and ideologies of religious extremists so that they can be safely reintegrated into society. The Commissioner General for Rehabilitation, Major General Darshana Hettiarachchi, explained to The Independent that the rehabilitation programmes will include meditation, yoga, and music therapy. In addition to this, independent scholars are set to lecture at the rehabilitation centres in an effort to “put people on the correct path”. This scenic description does little to silence concerns that the centres may facilitate human rights abuses. Since references to these centres can be made by government officials and without trial, individuals could be sent to these centres without a just and legal reason. Such unjustified detentions could be used to silence dissent and opposition or to target minorities.

Critics, including Human Rights Watch and human rights lawyer Ambika Satkunanathan, argue religious and racial minorities could be targeted and subject to torture and arbitrary detention as a result of the new regulations. These concerns are exacerbated by the increasing discrimination against Sri Lanka’s minority Muslim population following the suicide bombings carried out by Islamic extremists on Easter Sunday in 2019. The systematic prejudices already faced by Sri Lankan Muslims include plans for a burqa ban, the closures of Islamic schools, and the arrests of prominent Muslims. For example, poet Ahnaf Jazeem has been in custody since May 2020 because of peaceful poems he wrote, which were interpreted by authorities as enticing violence.

Even more troubling is that Sri Lanka has a dubious history with rehabilitating extremists. In the aftermath of the Sri Lankan civil war, members of the Tamil Tigers were sent to similar rehabilitation centres, which are often criticised for suspected human rights abuses. While the government maintains the programme was voluntary and peaceful, accounts of those who were confined to these centres paint a different picture. No access to legal representation, torture, and enforced disappearances are among the allegations against the Tamil Tiger rehabilitation centres.

INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT FOR SRI LANKA’S REHABILITATION CENTRES

An interesting dimension to the human rights concerns surrounding the PTA is that prominent international organisations, including the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the European Union, and Interpol, are funding the counterterrorism effort in Sri Lanka. The extent of these organisations’ contributions to the enforcement of the PTA’s controversial provisions and the new programme for rehabilitating extremists is unclear because there is little transparency on how these funds are being spent.

With plans already underway and little international pushback, these new centres for the rehabilitation of extremists will start running soon. In the context of growing prejudice against Sri Lanka’s Muslim population and a history of alleged human rights violations in similar programmes, whether the new regulations will follow the legacy of suspected human rights abuses in the centres used to rehabilitate Tamil Tigers remains to be seen.

Nadezhda is a Scots Law student at the University of Glasgow and an active member of the Lawyers Without Borders Student Division at the University. Her interests include international law, and human rights, especially human rights in Eastern Europe, and political human rights issues.

Linkedin