Sri Lanka's Supreme Court has determined that several provisions of the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTB) are inconsistent with the Constitution, Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickramaratne informed Parliament on Wednesday.
Bill Can Proceed with Simple Majority
Despite the constitutional concerns raised, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill may be passed by a simple majority in Parliament, provided that four specific committee-stage amendments are incorporated into the legislation. The announcement marks a significant development in the government's push to introduce new counter-terrorism legislation to replace the long-controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).
Constitutional Challenge Heard by Court
The Bill had been challenged before the Supreme Court by petitioners who raised objections to certain clauses within the proposed law. Following its review, the apex court identified the problematic provisions and prescribed the necessary amendments to bring the legislation into conformity with the Constitution.
Speaker Wickramaratne conveyed the court's determination to members of Parliament, outlining the conditions under which the Bill could lawfully proceed to a vote without requiring a two-thirds special majority.
What This Means Going Forward
With the Supreme Court's conditions now on the table, Parliament must incorporate the four stipulated committee-stage amendments before the Bill can be put to a vote. Key implications of this ruling include:
- The Bill does not require a two-thirds majority, making its passage significantly more achievable for the government.
- Four specific amendments must be adopted at the committee stage to address constitutional inconsistencies.
- The ruling clears a legal pathway for the government to advance its counter-terrorism legislative agenda.
The Protection of the State from Terrorism Act has been a subject of considerable debate among civil society groups, legal experts, and opposition politicians, many of whom have raised concerns about potential threats to civil liberties and due process under the proposed framework.
The Supreme Court's determination provides Parliament with a clear set of conditions under which the legislation may lawfully proceed, balancing national security imperatives with constitutional safeguards.
The Bill's passage through Parliament is expected to be closely watched by human rights organisations and legal professionals, who have been monitoring the country's efforts to reform its counter-terrorism legal framework in line with international standards.
💬 Join the Discussion 3
See what readers are saying — and add your view.
what were the four amendments? article doesnt even explain properly
At least SC is doing their job. some hope left in this country
hope? they'll just amend and pass it anyway, watch