Colombo, February 3, 2026 — The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) has issued a public statement warning of “emerging threats to the freedom of expression” and growing misuse of law enforcement powers to investigate allegedly defamatory speech, including speech by journalists.
The Commission expressed “deep concern” over a pattern where police have initiated inquiries into critical commentary, despite the fact that defamation is not a criminal offence under Sri Lankan law. This trend, it said, poses a serious danger to democratic participation and constitutional rights.
Journalist Summoned Without Explanation
The HRCSL highlighted a recent incident involving Tharindu Jayawardena, a journalist and member of its own Sub‑Committee on Freedom of Expression, who was summoned by police without being informed of the reason — a direct violation of a July 2025 directive requiring police to disclose reasons for all summons.
It was later revealed that the complaint against Jayawardena concerned allegedly defamatory remarks relating to corruption and misuse of public funds.
“Defamation Is Not a Crime,” HRCSL Reiterates
The Commission underscored that Sri Lanka fully decriminalised criminal defamation in 2002, when Chapter XIX of the Penal Code was repealed. As a result, police have no jurisdiction to investigate such complaints.
Any individual claiming reputational harm must pursue civil remedies in court, the HRCSL stressed, noting that misuse of police investigations for defamation threatens public freedoms and may provoke unrest.
The Commission also reminded that public officials and political leaders are expected to tolerate a higher degree of criticism, as required under both Sri Lankan and international human rights standards.
Concerns Over the Online Safety Act
The HRCSL has further raised constitutional concerns about the Online Safety Act (OSA), No. 9 of 2024, noting that the legislation fails to align with the Supreme Court’s determination on its draft bill and could only have passed constitutionally with a special majority — which it did not receive. In this context, the use of this Act to suppress the freedom of expression of any citizen, including for the purported purpose of preventing defamation, raises serious questions of constitutionality, HRCSL says.
While acknowledging the need for online safety, the Commission argued that the current Act is misdirected, replicating outdated colonial‑era offences instead of addressing real threats such as phishing, malware, spyware, hacking, and denial‑of‑service attacks.
Civil society groups recently consulted by HRCSL expressed “wide consensus” that the OSA should be repealed and replaced with a more appropriate framework.
Three Key Recommendations to the Government
To restore constitutional protections and prevent misuse of police powers, the HRCSL
- Declare a moratorium on the use of the Online Safety Act until it is repealed and replaced.
- Direct police nationwide to stop accepting or investigating defamation complaints, as defamation is not a crime.
- Urge political leaders to refrain from filing complaints with police over allegedly false or defamatory remarks.
A Warning for Sri Lanka’s Democracy
The Commission ended its statement by warning that disproportionate restrictions on free expression pose risks not only to individual rights but to democratic stability itself.
Its intervention signals growing concern across civil society that new legal tools and old institutional habits are being used to stifle critique rather than protect citizens in the digital age.
Read the full statement as a PDF:HRCSL Statement on the Freedom of Expression and O_260204_071249