Colombo, 21 October 2026 – The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has strongly criticised two proposed pieces of legislation currently before Parliament, warning that the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill (PSTA) and the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill (OCB) could significantly expand executive powers, weaken judicial oversight, and undermine fundamental rights and democratic safeguards. #
In a detailed statement issued on 21 October, the BASL said that although both Bills have been presented as legislative reforms, they would collectively grant extraordinary powers of arrest, detention and surveillance to the Executive while restricting judicial scrutiny at critical stages of criminal proceedings. The Association argued that the legislation could also create broad criminal liabilities with serious implications for freedoms of association, expression and movement.
Lessons from the PTA
The BASL situated its concerns within Sri Lanka’s experience under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), which was enacted as a temporary measure in 1979 but remained in force for more than four decades. According to the Association, successive governments have used the PTA not only against genuine security threats but also against political opponents, activists, journalists, students and ordinary citizens, resulting in prolonged detention without trial and the suppression of dissent.
The BASL cited the case of lawyer Hejaaz Hizbullah, who was arrested in April 2020 and held for 22 months under the PTA before being released on bail in February 2022. The organisation argued that the case demonstrated how exceptional detention powers can be misused and have a chilling effect on public discourse and civic activism.
According to the BASL, Sri Lanka’s past experience demonstrates that laws granting broad executive powers can be vulnerable to abuse regardless of the political party in government. The Association warned that replacing the PTA with new legislation that retains similar features risks reproducing the same problems under a different legal framework.
Concerns Over the Terrorism Bill
The BASL revealed that it participated in consultations aimed at drafting the PSTA and nominated senior lawyers Saliya Pieris and Chanaka de Silva to serve on the review committee. However, it contends that the final gazetted version of the Bill differs significantly from the text approved by the committee and that these changes were not referred back to committee members for review before publication.
Among the Association’s principal concerns are provisions that would require mandatory remand of suspects, substantially limit magistrates’ discretion, and impose significant restrictions on bail. The BASL warned that bail under the proposed law would generally be available only through the High Court and that suspects facing more serious offences could remain detained for lengthy periods even where evidence is weak.
The Association also objected to the removal of provisions requiring judicial approval for extensions of detention beyond an initial period, arguing that this would diminish court supervision over the deprivation of liberty. Further concerns include expanded executive powers relating to restriction orders and organisational proscription, broader offences and immunities, and a narrowing of protections surrounding legal advice.
The BASL said it had written to Justice and National Integration Minister Harshana Nanayakkara on 8 October 2026 outlining these objections and urging that the departures from the committee-approved draft be rectified through amendments. According to the Association, no response had been received at the time the statement was issued.
The organisation has also filed a petition before the Supreme Court seeking a special determination on the constitutionality of the Bill. It argues that several provisions are inconsistent with constitutional protections relating to liberty, equality, freedom of expression, assembly and association, protection from arbitrary detention, and the right to information.
Organised Crime Bill Draws Separate Criticism
The BASL also expressed serious reservations about the proposed Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill, despite recognising the state’s legitimate interest in combating organised criminal activity. The Association noted that no public consultation was conducted prior to the drafting of the Bill and that the composition of the body responsible for preparing it has not been disclosed.
According to the BASL, the Bill creates what it describes as a parallel regulatory regime by classifying as “serious crimes” not only offences punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more but also approximately 50 offences listed in its schedule, including certain intellectual property, excise, forest and gambling-related offences.
The Association argues that individuals accused of such offences could be detained under orders issued by executive authorities for up to one year, while judicial scrutiny would be limited and access to bail restricted to the High Court. It contends that courts would not determine whether detention is necessary before such orders take effect.
To illustrate the Bill’s broad scope, the BASL provided a hypothetical example involving an amateur music group performing copyrighted songs without permission. It argued that, under a literal interpretation of the legislation, such a group could potentially be treated as an organised criminal organisation, exposing members to detention and asset forfeiture provisions intended to combat serious criminal networks.
The organisation further warned that the Bill allows courts to consider factors such as dress, tattoos, language, social associations and attendance at meetings when determining whether an individual is a member of an organised criminal group. The BASL said such provisions risk disproportionately affecting young people and marginalised communities.
Impact on Protest and Civil Society
One of the most significant concerns raised by the BASL relates to the possible impact of the OCB on peaceful protest activity, trade unions and civil society organisations. The Association argued that offences listed in the Bill could potentially be applied to conduct arising from public demonstrations, creating a risk that protest organisers and participants could become subject to extraordinary investigative and detention powers.
The BASL also criticised provisions that would allow statements made in police custody to be admitted as evidence and place certain burdens on accused persons or company directors to demonstrate their innocence or due diligence. It argued that these measures weaken the presumption of innocence and fair trial guarantees.
Call for Withdrawal and Reform
The BASL stressed that it acknowledges the state’s responsibility to protect the public from terrorism and organised crime. However, it maintained that efforts to achieve those objectives must not come at the expense of constitutional safeguards, judicial independence and the rule of law.
In its statement, the Association called on the Government to withdraw the PSTA in its current form and restore safeguards contained in the committee-approved draft. It also urged the publication of the committee’s report and dissenting views, withdrawal of the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill pending meaningful public consultation, and the repeal of the PTA without delay.
The BASL said it would continue pursuing its concerns before the Government, Parliament and the Supreme Court and reserved its rights to challenge aspects of the Organised Crimes Bill through constitutional mechanisms. The Association stated that its actions are aimed at protecting fundamental rights, preserving judicial oversight and safeguarding constitutional democracy in Sri Lanka.
The statement in full –STATEMENT ON THE PROTECTION OF THE STATE FROM TERRORISM BILL AND THE PREVENTION OF ORGANISED CRIMES BILL