The government remains open to discussion on the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill, Transport Minister Bimal Rathnayake has said — the first time a minister has responded on the record to the objections that have accumulated against the legislation over the past fortnight.
Rathnayake said on Sunday that any specific concerns or shortcomings identified in the Bill could be addressed through discussions, the Daily Mirror reported on Monday. The Bill was recently tabled in Parliament.
“We need an Act to protect the State. Any specific concerns regarding the Bill can be addressed through discussion. We are open to discussions,” he said.
The government’s argument
Rathnayake framed the Bill as a replacement rather than an addition. He noted that the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) has faced criticism for nearly four decades over its alleged undemocratic nature, and that the National People’s Power government had pledged to repeal it.
The government is taking steps to abolish the PTA, he said, and a replacement law is needed — one that would be more democratic, more effective, and consistent with internationally accepted principles. He added that a new legal framework was necessary to address ongoing threats posed by organised crime and international terrorism.
What is being objected to
Several organisations, including the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), have warned that the proposed legislation retains or expands a number of the shortcomings found in the existing PTA and in previous counter-terrorism legislative proposals.
That objection is the substance of the dispute, and the minister’s statement does not engage with it directly. The government’s case is that the PTA must be replaced; the critics’ case is that the proposed replacement reproduces the features that made the PTA objectionable. Monday’s filing reports the first position without reporting any government answer to the second.
Context
Opposition to the Bill and its companion legislation has been sustained and broad. In the past two weeks the Bar Association and the Human Rights Commission have called for withdrawal, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have objected, the Ceylon Chamber of Commerce raised concerns tied to GSP+, PAFFREL wrote to the government, and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa attacked both bills at a rally in Polonnaruwa. Twenty-two petitions have been filed against the Bill in the Supreme Court, and petitions against the companion Organised Crimes Bill are also mounting.
Not reported
The filing does not say where or in what setting Rathnayake was speaking, whether he was responding to a specific objection, or whether the government has offered a forum or timetable for the discussions he describes. It does not state whether any clause of the Bill is under reconsideration, or whether the repeal of the PTA is to be moved alongside the new Bill or separately. Rathnayake holds the Transport portfolio; the filing does not explain why he rather than the Justice Minister spoke on the legislation.