The special committee reviewing Sri Lanka’s prison rules has recommended that imprisoned Buddhist monks be allowed to wear their robes whenever they are taken outside prison premises — a right that would stand unless the monk’s own chapter formally objects.
The committee’s interim report was handed to Secretary to the President Dr. Nandika Sanath Kumanayake at the Presidential Secretariat on Wednesday, NewsFirst reported. It was delivered by committee chairperson Prince Senadheera, Secretary to the Ministry of Buddhasasana, Religious and Cultural Affairs.
Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara set out the contents in a special statement at the Ministry of Justice the same day, Hiru News reported. He said a monk would be entitled to wear his robes “unless the relevant Buddhist Chapter decides otherwise”, according to the Daily Mirror.
Two instruments, not one
The Minister described two separate changes, NewsFirst reported in a second filing:
- Prison Regulation 356, to be revised by inserting a new provision 356A. This gives the Commissioner General of Prisons a ten-day period to consult the Department of Buddhist Affairs and decide what should happen to a monk’s robes when he is admitted to prison as an inmate.
- Departmental Order 550, to be amended by interim order so that monks leaving prison premises for any official purpose have full permission to wear their robes while outside.
The Daily Mirror compressed both into a single reference to “Standing Order 356”, attributing the ten-day consultation window to it. NewsFirst’s fuller account separates the admission question (Regulation 356A) from the going-outside question (Departmental Order 550). The distinction matters, because only the second one creates the robe entitlement that the dispute has been about.
Nanayakkara said similar provisions could be adapted for clergy of other religions who are imprisoned. He added that the interim report and a covering letter have already gone to the Acting Commissioner General of Prisons, with instructions to amend the regulations accordingly.
The committee adopted the Mahanayake Theras’ core demand
The significant move is who gets the final say. When the four Mahanayake Theras wrote to the President earlier this month, their position was that only they may decide on removing a monk’s robe, following an investigation conducted in keeping with Buddhist tradition, and that prison authorities have no such role.
The recommendation now on the table inverts the default in their favour: the robe is worn as of right, and the monk’s chapter or Nikaya must formally notify authorities if it wants that permission withheld. Prison authorities retain a consultative role at the point of admission, not a decisive one.
It arrived a day early, and the archive says it was billed differently
Ministry Secretary Senadheera said on 11 October that the report was scheduled to reach the Presidential Secretary on Thursday 15 October. It was handed over on Wednesday the 14th — a day ahead of the stated schedule, and eight days into the two-week window the President set when he appointed the committee on 8 October.
The outlets also differ on what was delivered. Hiru reported on Wednesday morning that the committee was to hand over its final report to the President that day. Both NewsFirst filings and the Justice Minister’s own statement call it an interim report. The interim description is the one carried by every later filing, and by the Minister himself.
What it still does not cover
The scope remains what it was when the drafting began: robes worn when a monk is escorted outside prison premises. On these accounts it does not settle what a monk wears inside prison, where Regulation 216 requires prison-issue clothing for those serving rigorous imprisonment — the point this newsroom flagged when the substance of the amendments first became known.
The committee was appointed after Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thera was produced in court in civilian clothing rather than his robes, following his return to Welikada Prison to serve a six-year sentence. A separate fundamental rights petition over the same matter is before the Supreme Court.
Not reported
None of the filings says when the amended regulations take legal effect, whether they apply retrospectively to Gnanasara Thera, or what happens during the ten-day consultation window before the Commissioner General decides. None states whether the Mahanayake Theras have reviewed the interim report — the Ministry said on 11 October that it would be submitted to them — or whether the committee’s final report is still to come, and when.
