93 Civil Society activists and 10 organisations have today urged the government to fulfil its obligations to its citizens and its international obligations by withdrawing the bills (amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure and amendment to the Penal Code ) forthwith and commit anew to fostering a political culture conducive to the exercise of citizens’ free speech rights.
We publish below the statement in full;
Joint civil society statement on amendment to Penal Code criminalizing hate speech
We the under signed organizations and individuals are deeply concerned about two Bills tabled in Parliament on Friday, 11th December 2015 ostensibly to criminalize hate speech and the instigation of communal violence and disharmony. One such Bill tabled is an amendment to the Penal Code which creates the new offence of “causing of or instigating acts of violence, hostility…” which is punishable by imprisonment of up to two years. The other Bill is an amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides for the conditions necessary for the initiation of prosecutions for the new offence.
The new offence under the Penal Code is particularly problematic as it is a near verbatim reproduction of the language in Section 2(1) (h) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). The offence as provided in the Bill is overbroad and general, and is not a permissible restriction in relation to freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution and by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Furthermore, the proposed amendment, if enacted, could lead to a culture of self-censorship and perpetuate a chilling effect on free speech. We note that Section 2(1) (h) of the PTA was previously used to convict journalist J. S. Tissainayagam for his journalistic writing on alleged war crimes committed by government forces. This overbroad restriction on the freedom of expression is in no way defensible in a democratic society. Furthermore there is a very real possibility, as demonstrated by past experience, that this legislation could be used by governments to target political opponents and those critical of government policy.
We the undersigned question the need for new legislation criminalizing “hate speech” as there are several legal provisions that already do so. The provisions contained in the ICCPR Act 56 of 2007 already criminalize advocating national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. The Penal Code provides for the offences of “uttering words with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings”(Section 291A), “deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class, by insulting its religion or religious beliefs” (Section 291B). Furthermore the Penal Code provides for several other offences to protect places of religious worship and religious assembly. These offences themselves already constitute a serious curtailment of the freedom of expression.
Given the multiplicity of laws in Sri Lanka dealing with what could broadly be termed hate speech, our view is that attacks targeting particular religious groups were not the result of a lack of legislation to prosecute perpetrators, but of the selective implementation of existing laws and the lack of political will to implement those laws against the purveyors of violent hate. In these circumstances, we urge the government to fulfil its obligations to its citizens and its international obligations by withdrawing the bills forthwith and commit anew to fostering a political culture conducive to the exercise of citizens’ free speech rights.
Signatories Individuals
Ainslie Joseph – Convenor, Christian Alliance for Social Action
Annouchka Wijesinghe
Aruni Jayakody
B. Gowthaman
Balasingham Skanthakumar
Bhavani Fonseka – Attorney-at-Law
Bishop Duleep de Chickera
Bishop Kumara Illangasinghe
Brito Fernando
Caryll Tozer
Chameera Perera – Left Center
Chandra Jayaratne
Chandraguptha Thenuwara
Chulani Kodikara
D.B.S. Jeyaraj – Journalist
Deanne Uyangoda
Dr. Farzana Haniffa – Senior Lecturer, Sociology – University of Colombo
Dr. Jehan Perera
Dr. Kumudu Kusum Kumara – University of Colombo
Dr. L. Solomons
Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
Dr. S.B. Dhanapala
Dr. Shamala Kumar – University of Peradeniya
Faizun Zackariya – Citizens Voice
Gajen Mahendra
Gamini Viyangoda
Gayathri Gamage
Godfrey Yogarajah – Executive Director, Religious Liberty Commission & World Evangelical Alliance
Gowrie Ponniah
Hans Billimoria
Harini Amarasuriya
Herman Kumara
Iromi Perera
Ishan Jalill – Founder and Executive Director, Action Against Apathy
Jake Oorloff
Jeanne Samuel
Joe William
Jovita Arulanantham
K. Aingkaran
Kalani Subasinghe
Kumari Kumaragamage
Kusal Perera – Journalist
Lakshan Dias – Attorney-at-Law
Lionel Guruge
Luwie Ganeshathasan – Attorney-at-Law
Mala Liyanage
Manouri Muttetuwegama
Marisa de Silva
Mujeebur Rahman – Journalist (Mannar)
Nalini Ratnarajah – Woman Human Rights Defender
Nigel Nugawela
Nilantha Ilangamuwa – Journalist and Editor, Sri Lanka Guardian
Nimalka Fernando
Niran Anketell – Attorney-at-Law
P. Selvaratnam
Paba Deshapriya
Philip Setunga
Prof. Jayantha Seneviratne – University of Kelaniya
Prof. S. Sivamohan
Qadri Ismail
R.M.B Senanayake – Retired C.C.S
Rev. Br. Loyola Fernando FSC
Rev. Dr. Jayasiri T. Peiris – Friday Forum
Rev. Fr. Jeyabalan Croos
Rev. Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda
Rev. Fr. T.L.R. Dominic
Rev. Jason Selvaraja – Assembly of God, Chavakachcheri
Ronnie Yogarajah
Ruki Fernando
S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole
S. Samaraarachchi
S.C.C. Elankovan
Sabra Zahid
Sampath Samarakoon
Sanjana Hattotuwa – Founding Editor, Groundviews.org
Sanjayan Rajasingham
Shakthi Ponniah
Shashika Bandara
Sheila Richards
Shreen Abdul Saroor
Sriyanie Wijesundara
Sudarshana Gunawardana – Attorney-at-Law
Sunanda Deshapriya
Sunethra Bandaranaike
Suren D. Perera – Human Rights Lawyer and Activist
Suriya Wickremasinghe
T. Mathuri – Attorney-at-Law
Tanuja Thurairajah
Tehani Ariyaratne
Thyagi Ruwanpathirana
Udaya Kalupathirana
Visaka Dharmadasa
Waruna Padmasiri – Attorney-at-Law
Organizations
Association of War Affected Women (AWAW)
Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA)
Families of the Disappeared (FoD)
INFORM Human Rights Documentation Centre
Law and Society Trust (LST)
National Fisheries Solidarity Movement (NAFSO)
National Peace Council (NPC)
Right to Life (R2L) Human Rights Centre
Rights Now Collective for Democracy
Women’s Action Network (WAN)
Thiru / December 15, 2015
The present so-called good governance advocates, it seems, are not different from the previous regime that violated all local and international laws and norms with impunity.
/
Amarasiri / December 15, 2015
RE”Civil Society Urges Govt. To Withdraw Bills Criminalizing Hate Speech
Are these 93 Organization Civil Society or Hate Society?
What about Murder? Rape?
/
Kumar Sandirasegaram / December 15, 2015
I agree with the authors of the letter however what is needed is for us to go back to the drawing board and make all religions equal and not declare one religion and race superior to others in a multi racial society. This piece of the constitution is the principal factor that politicians and others indulge to benifit themself for electrol purposes. Politicians have often used this piece of unfair legal requirement to generate nationalism. How can you build a civilised society when you do undermine civilisation by permitting an unequal treatment of the minorities. I believe that the laws of equality will be sufficient and must be followed with proper equality training for the judiciary and the law enforcement authorities. We need to learn from the war and the economic mess that we are in at the moment. All those societies in South Asia who are prospering economically are not divided on the basis of race and religion. My recommendation to these elite movers and chakers to take head on the supremacy of the majority race and religion. Enshrine equality in our Constituion in bold letters and ensure it is practiced and implemented to solve our broken society in the first instance.
/
soma / December 16, 2015
Dear Mr Kumar, what is your opinion if I suggest party names like HELA Urumaya, TAMIL National Alliance and MUSLIM Congress should not be recognized in the electoral register?
Soma
/
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / December 16, 2015
Very welcome. A move that is long overdue.
Dr.RN
/
Susruta / December 16, 2015
Dear Soma
Sounds a great idea
I suppose you intend that even groups calling themselves Buddhist or Sinhala should also be banned
And while you are at it being the Universalist you are you will also banish parties that privilege any religion e.g. Buddhism or any language e.g. Sinhalese
Dear Soma with such noble persons as you this country of ours will be truly a land dear to the enlightened one
/
Humbug / December 16, 2015
Agree. To a very great extend this would also help. However, the extremists elements in all these parties/religions would not like it and would revolt.
/
Native Vedda / December 16, 2015
soma
“I suggest party names like HELA Urumaya, TAMIL National Alliance and MUSLIM Congress should not be recognized in the electoral register? “
Very very good idea, coming from makes me bit sceptical.
What do you suggest we should do about CHAPTER II – BUDDHISM?
Buddhism.
9. The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e).
Also Vijaya’s story in history books?
/
soma / December 17, 2015
Of course, it goes without saying that abolishion of the said clause on Buddhism and constitutional abolition of ethnicity and religion based politics goes hand in hand.
As for Vijaya, the ‘story’ of Vijaya has a long history. You and I can’t help it. The ‘belief’ that Buddha visited Sri Lanka has a long history. The ‘story’ of Adam and Eve has a long history. The ‘theory’ that sun goes round earth and and earth is a flat disc has a long history. Why not children learn about all this facinating history?
Your unquencheble hatred towards anything remotely connected with ‘Sinhala’ or ‘Buddhism’ , I pray, shall soon be a part of your personal history.
Soma
/
Native Vedda / December 17, 2015
somaass
“Your unquencheble hatred towards anything remotely connected with ‘Sinhala’ or ‘Buddhism’”
As ever you are you and I am Native.
It is a battle between rationality and Sinhala/Buddhist ideology or lack of it.
You still believe in flat earth theory and this little island is in the centre of this flat earth, hence it is not surprising that you would rather perpetuate myth(s).
/
Amarasiri / December 15, 2015
93 Civil Society activists and 10 organisations
“93 Civil Society activists and 10 organisations have today urged the government to fulfil its obligations to its citizens and its international obligations by withdrawing the bills (amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure and amendment to the Penal Code ) forthwith and commit anew to fostering a political culture conducive to the exercise of citizens’ free speech rights.”
Free Speech Rights are Fine, but will they be accountable and responsible for the Dangers to the Free Society because of those Rights, and will the State enforce it’s Laws in Sri Lanka? No.
Hate Speech at Alutgama and killings. None of those accountable were taken into custody.
RE: Joint civil society statement on amendment to Penal Code criminalizing hate speech,
So, the next best thing is to criminalize hate speech and persecute those responsible individuals, instead of going after all those who mobs were misled to the whims of the politicians and the Sinhala “Buddhist” Monks.
Yes, Yes and Yes, Criminalize Hate Speech and prosecute the culprits. Treat them as Traitors to the People, for inciting one section of the people against the other.
We have seen enough in 1958, 1983 and 2014.
/
Sanchay / December 15, 2015
this matter is much complicated as it sounds just “citizens’ free speech rights”. What does it mean actually? is it OK if I write a public article saying “all Tamils are terrorists” or “all Singhalese are racists”? where is the boarder to cross? There should be a mechanism to cordon the discriminationating or violence provocating sppeches and writings. A kind of “Code of moral conduct” should be in place but this is subjective to each and everybody. For an example in Germany, where I live, delivering a public note denouncing a community or ethnic group as inferior or collectively racist etc. will call the law in action.
Are we going to allow BBS to say that all non-singhala-buddists have no right to live in Sri Lanka and invoke a pogrom, or similarly any Tamil politician claim that in jaffna no other ethnicity is tolerated drivin the mob to terrorize the Muslims and Singhalese. We have to learn first a moral code of conduct, independant of our ancient culture and “moral high grounds” only then such self deciplined standard can exist.
/
Sanchay / December 15, 2015
The Picture of Gnanasara under the title “Civil Society Urges Govt. To Withdraw Bills Criminalizing Hate Speech” itself is discriminating. It implies that either he or BBS has the right to say anything about other communities in the public or provokes the opinion that the Gnanasara is involved somehow in this matter.
/
soma / December 16, 2015
There is an infinite amount of hate speech against BBS and Gnanasara, in far worse language.
Soma
/
maalumiris / December 16, 2015
@soma
And very well-deserved it is too !!!!
/
Native Vedda / December 16, 2015
maalumiris
somass is one of Gnanasara’s b***s carrier.
/
Nagananda / December 15, 2015
Laws forbidding hate speech are a need of the hour
In the UK, regarded as mother of the democracy, the hate speech is absolutely forbidden. Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person’s colour, race, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, or sexual orientation is forbidden. Any communication, which is threatening or abusive, and is intended to harass, alarm, or distress someone is also forbidden.
The penalties for hate speech include fines, imprisonment, or both.
The Public Order Act 1986 prohibits, by its Part 3, expressions of racial hatred, which is defined as hatred against a group of persons by reason of the group’s colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.
Section 18 of the Act says:
A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
Offences under Part 3 carry a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment or a fine or both.
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 inserted Section 4A into the Public Order Act 1986. That part prohibits anyone from causing alarm or distress. Section 4A states:
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he— (a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or (b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.
A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both.
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 amended the Public Order Act 1986 by adding Part 3A. That Part says, “A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.”
These laws act as a deterrent against hate speech instilling discipline amongst all communities. And I find nothing wrong at all in enacting such laws here as well, which is a dire need in a democratic society. Such speeches are mostly made by bankrupt politicos for petty political gains and likely to lead towards racial unrest amongst multi-ethnic society.
/
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / December 15, 2015
Nagananda,
A big thank you.
Dr.RN
/
Plato. / December 15, 2015
The Learned Ladies & Gentleman who have issued this statement appear to have been unable to see the wood for the Trees! How about the Prevention of Terrorism Act?
/
Ajith / December 15, 2015
The Sri Lankan law – ICCPR Act No. 56 of 2007 already covers hate speech. Section 3 says:
“No person shall propagate war or advocate national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.”
Why can’t the government enforce this law?? Why are they bringing a NEW LAW without enforcing this EXISTING law?
Let me explain why! If a new law is brought it will not apply to past acts!
The government wants to avoid prosecuting BBS and Gnanasara by bringing a new law and then saying it can’t apply to past acts. This is the plan.
/
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / December 15, 2015
If there are enough provisions in existing laws to prevent hate speech and related offenses, why were such offences not prosecuted since independence.
As a ten year old boy, I heard Wijeyananda Dahanayake raising his index finger and adjoining shorter finger and asking how the two fingers can be the same, at a political rally in Kelaniya in 1956? He went on to identify the longer finger with the Sinhalese and the shorter finger with the Tamils. He said in a loud voice, the longer fingerer has to be cut, if it is to be made equal to the shorter finger and it will hurt and bleed!
The BBS planned incidents of violence in Beruwala and Aluthgama where Gnanasara used extreme violent speech also did not result in any prosecutions. Where was the law?
There is something inherently wrong with the existing laws. If there are flaws and loop holes in the proposed amendments, identify them and change them. Add a provision that policemen who fail to arrest and prosecute offenders and politicians who interfere with this process will be liable to 20 years hard labor in prison and confiscation of property!
Dr.RN
/
Inspector Dirty Hari / December 16, 2015
Dr RN,
“If there are enough provisions in existing laws to prevent hate speech and related offenses, why were such offences not prosecuted since independence.”
There are many good laws that the British left and good newer laws but unfortunately they are not implemented by the police and the courts.
I hope you have noticed the resistance to the traffic lanes in Colombo. The bus owners refuse to accept the law.
Some years ago there were much needed new regulations for school vehicle drivers and the vehicles. The vehicle owners and drivers quite simply refused to comply and the authorities backed down.
Corporal punishment is forbidden in schools but continues.
Rape is illegal but I believe that about 90% of the rapists are not punished even if the crime is reported.
All the promises of development and becoming the next Singapore will remain promises as long as the rule of law does not exist.
/
Dr. Rajasingham Narendran / December 16, 2015
To ensure a balance, I have to also recount a reported incident where Mrs. Mangayatkarasi Amirthalingam, proclaimed at an election meeting somewhere in Jaffna that the Tamils will make slippers from the skin of Sinhalese ( she was probably referring to soldiers) !
Dr.RN
/
sach / December 16, 2015
I am just asking you this question, can Telungu culture or identity has the same place in tamil nadu? Tamil Nadu is the cultural homeland of tamils..right?
Can a French or a German identity has the same significance in England the English homeland?
can an English identity has the same significance in germany, the german homeland?
SO in the same way can any non sinhala identity have the same significance in SL, which is the sinhala homeland. Sinhala people are not being racist they are asking for their legitimate right in their homeland.
What you are suggesting is trampling that legitimate right. What you expect is a minority rule over a majority. That is what pre colonial tamil politicians wanted and 50-50 is the result of it which the sinhalese rejected with disgust.
when the tamil politicans could not rule over sinhalese and ultimately realising that they cannot with universal suffrage they shifted their focus on another thing which is separatism.
/
Sanchay / December 16, 2015
Sach,
dont put your ignorance to public show in this forum. Yes a french or german identity is not same and should not be same but has the same significance in England or elsewhere in the civilized world. I am not implying that racism does not exist in countries other than Sri Lanka but what I am trying to tell is the existing politics does not try to impliment the racial politics to stay in power. Germany has a chancellor since last 12+, who came from a East Germany with strong socialistic ideology. India has PM from a minor community Belgium had a state chief from a minority community.
If you close your eyes and say you are blind then you stay blind because you want it like that.
/
sach / December 16, 2015
what nonsense…..germany is for the german, english is for the england….there is something called cultural homeland a particular ethinicty had made its motherland for thousands of years…And SL is Sinhala’s homeland…
SL is sinhala as much as England is English people’s…
Disagreeing to that and even trying to change that is what racism is
/
Sanchay / December 16, 2015
Sach,
and my intelligent beast, what do you thing whom belong USA and Canada??? and a whole lot of african countries were never there befor the english left the african continent and there were no Syria and no Israel…. please stop talking half baked nonsense for the racist gallery.
to argue the way you do first prove that Sri Lanka belongs to Singhales, and please dont come with Mahawamsa and other legends. if so then you are not at all a humanbeing (how it sounds already) but a son of a lion and and a woman who slept with this lion.
/
Sanchay / December 16, 2015
and for your cultural homeland argument… then the North and east are the cultural homeland of Tamils for thousands of years!
/
Native Vedda / December 16, 2015
sachoooooo the stupid II
“.germany is for the german, english is for the england”
National languages of Switzerland are German, French, Italian and Romansh.
Recognized minority languages in Germany:
Upper Sorbian and Lower Sorbian
Romani
Danish
North Frisian
and Saterland Frisian
Hindia’s officially recognised languages:
Assamese
English
Sindhi
Hindi
Punjabi
Nepali
Bengali
Odia
Telugu
Tamil
Malayalam
Kannada
Gujarati
Marathi
Urdu etc.
Official languages of Singapore are Malay, Mandarin, Tamil, and English
Official languages of South Africa:
Afrikaans
English
Ndebele
Northern Sotho
Sotho
Swazi
Tsonga
Tswana
Venda
Xhosa
Zulu.
/
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / December 15, 2015
If I recall correctly, the LLRC report also recommended new laws against hate crimes. The LLRC report was accepted by the last government and civil society without reservations. Why the sudden opposition to the concept now?
Dr.RN
/
Burning Issue / December 15, 2015
DR RN,
There is no doubt that the existing provisions are inadequate and unclear. However, the new law must define as to the exact meaning of Hate Speech. There should not be ambiguity and any criticisms and critical writings should not be deemed as hate speech. This is where GOSL must study such provisions in the western counties to get it right. Above all, the state must enforce the law equally and on this subject SL have found wanting as far as the minorities are concerned!
/
Native Vedda / December 15, 2015
Burning Issue
If I address the Tamils and Sinhalese as Kallathonies, would I be punished under the proposed law?
Remember these people are the descendants of Kallathonies, a historical fact that no one can deny.
/
Amarasiri / December 16, 2015
Native Vedda
“Remember these people are the descendants of Kallathonies, a historical fact that no one can deny.”
Not Only are the Sinhala and Tamils are Hora Oru Kall Thonises, Illegal Boats, they are Para-Sinhala and Para- Tamils.
Given below is the peer reviewed scientific support for the above assertion.
Mitochondrial DNA history of Sri Lankan ethnic people: their relations within the island and with the Indian subcontinental populations
Journal of Human Genetics (2014) 59, 28–36; doi:10.1038/jhg.2013.112; published online 7 November 2013
http://www.nature.com/jhg/journal/v59/n1/full/jhg2013112a.html
“Through a comparison with the mtDNA HVS-1 and part of HVS-2 of Indian database, both Tamils and Sinhalese clusters were affiliated with Indian subcontinent populations than Vedda people who are believed to be the native population of the island of Sri Lanka.”
/
maalumiris / December 16, 2015
Dear Native
Are you asking the question because you are using “Kallathoni” as a derogatory term here ?
And are you REALLY a N.V. ? Or you are just another one of the above, identifying with the REAL N.V.’s of the Island ?
Just asking :)
/
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / December 16, 2015
NV.
If you call everyone a Kallathoni, recognizing the fact that all of us, including the Veddhas, Rakshashas, etc., are descendants of those who walked across from East Africa , it will be pure science and not hate speech!
Many of us yet resemble East Africans to a great extent!
Dr.RN
/
Amarasiri / December 16, 2015
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran
“Many of us yet resemble East Africans to a great extent! “
Not according to the Mahawansa, the Bible and the Quran.
/
maali karunaratne / December 20, 2015
Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims are kallathonies but it is derogatory because by how the word was used for years. It has been used against the minorities, particularly Tamils of recent origin. A word gets its meaning from the way it has been used. For instance Thambi is brother can be an endearing term (as pointed out by a CT commentator), but it has been used in a derogatory term against Muslims.
/
maalumiris / December 16, 2015
@Burning Issue
You are right. Who is to say what is and is not “Hate Speech” ? Any law is open to abusive interpretation and in the case of ambiguous ones like this one will be, even more so. Like the PTA/POTA, Homeland Security etc. if it can be abused, it will be
/
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / December 16, 2015
Burning Issue,
Yes.
Dr.RN
/
Nathan / December 15, 2015
Those who are disciplined need no laws. Just guidelines.
What is being protested is not the enactment, but the effect it has on the Society, with the apparatus that is there to enforce it.
When the enforcement is in the hands of a subjective police force no law can produce the desired effect.
/
Susruta / December 16, 2015
Dear Soma
Sounds a great idea
I suppose you intend that even groups calling themselves Buddhist or Sinhala should also be banned
And while you are at it being the Universalist you are you will also banish parties that privilege any religion e.g. Buddhism or any language e.g. Sinhalese
Dear Soma with such noble persons as you this country of ours will be truly a land dear to the enlightened one
/
Ajith / December 15, 2015
It is sad that the laws in this country have been used unlawfully by the governments itself rather than people. BBS used and still uses hatred against Muslims when they were part of government or under the guard of govt. A large number of Heads of Govt, Institutions and Religious leaders used hatred against Tamils since independence. As long as Srilankan politics remain race based or religion based the laws are just for propaganda. Can this government break the barrier by punishing former President Mahinda Rajapakse who is now spreading hatred speech against Tamils?
/
Amarasiri / December 15, 2015
RE”Civil Society Urges Govt. To Withdraw Bills Criminalizing Hate Speech
Are these 93 Organization Civil Society or Hate Society?
Hate Crime is a Mental illness of the Sinhala “Buddhists” and the Wahhabi and Muslim Fundamentalists and other fundamentalists and racists.
So you want the Sinhala Buddhists to be able to keep calling Tamils Para Demnala, and Muslims Pigs?
So you want the Wahhabis and “Muslim” Terrorists to call other Muslims Devil Followers and therefore need to be killed?
where does it end?
Make each accountable.
Islam & Mental Illness (Arabic with Subs. So is Sinhala “Buddhism”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g4cMjpiBpA
Hate Crime is a Mental illness of the Sinhala “Buddhists” and the Wahhabi and Muslim Fundamentalists and other fundamentalists and racists. They belong in asylums and in Prison.
Therefore, have law has to keep them in a safe place so that they are not a threat to society and themselves.
/
Mallaiyuran / December 15, 2015
There is a man with mental disease has been arrest in Vidya’s case. Tamil newses quoting her brother pointed finger at him and the government security forces grabbed him right away. Is this a comedy of the century?
Funny comedians who used impeachment process to impeach an Opposition leader is bring another draconian act. These guys had a reason to bring Sinhala Only, Standardization….
PTA
Emergency Regulations
6th amendment
Sampanthar unnecessarily block the opposition leader seat. If Old King was on that chair certainly Yahapalanaya government and Ranil would have come for a deal with him and would have abandoned this. What is Sampanthar can do to this? Let him wait there for until he too is impeached. That is not too far away. After the next American presidential election!
/
soma / December 16, 2015
Half the articles and 95% comments on Colombo Telegraph are hate specch against Sinhala Buddhists.
I stand by Native Vedda and Amarasiri on their right to say whatever they wish to say about us.
Soma
/
Nathan / December 16, 2015
Let me see if could draw some conclusions from your speech.
1) You soma are a Sinhala Buddhist.
2) 95% of those who comment on CT believe in hate speeches.
3) You accepts that those who make hate speeches have a right to do so.
4) There are 3 men, to your knowledge, who believe in that damn right.
5) Among those who comment on CT Sinhala Buddists make up 5% or less.
6) No Sinhala Buddist believes in or makes hate speeches.
7) soma does not make hate speeches.
8) This speech of soma is not a hate speech.
/
soma / December 16, 2015
“3) You accepts that those who make hate speeches have a right to do so.”
Yes. Every unethical notion cannot be made illegal.
Soma
/
Nathan / December 16, 2015
Hate speech is incitement. It is inflammatory instigation. From where did your finding that it is simply an unethical notion emanate?
/
soma / December 17, 2015
Nathan
It emanates from the fact that Christ or Buddha did not advocate laws that entail physical punishment to curb hatred. Presumably one is son of God and the other is the son of ruling king and they could very well adopt that line if they chose to.
Many disapprove of laws against hate speech because it is like banning kitchen knives.
Underccurrent incitement and instigation could be worse than open hate speech. Because, immediately the opposite opinion can be launched. You are assuming that the audience are fools and cannot be trusted to choose between the two opinions.
Soma
/
Native Vedda / December 17, 2015
somass
“Many disapprove of laws against hate speech because it is like banning kitchen knives.”
If ever this island bring in hate crime laws, you will be permanently kept inside for the rest of your life.
I don’t think prisons are best institutions for the rehabilitation of bigots, therefore I oppose it.
/
K.A Sumanasekera / December 16, 2015
So they like Hate Speech… right.
No wonder Vellala Sambandan of the TNA and Norwegian trained Gnanissara bot signed this petition demanding withdrawal..
Come to think of it, all these does will have their work cut out, if these new rules come in to effect…
/
Native Vedda / December 17, 2015
KASmaalam K.A Sumanasekera
“So they like Hate Speech… right.”
Probably they care for you.
/
Susruta / December 16, 2015
Nathan
You are right
These protesters are sure that this country will never be free of rotten judges – having watched the appointments the Yahas are making what hope is there that things will be any different??
That being so they should really be praying at some temple with copious tears down their ample cheeks instead of indulging in these writing exercises
/
EDWIN RODRIGO / December 16, 2015
There is kind speech strewn with Metta, hate speech strewn with – yes that is right – with hatred and a myriad of other forms of speech. The problem is how to define hate speech. We must have standards and examples.
Let us start with the good end of the spectrum. May I suggest that we take the speeches that emanate from Abhaya-Rajapaksaramaya as an excellent example non-hate critical speech?
The motive of the speaker here is corrective in nature. With his long experience in speech making, speech breaking and speaker bashing, the speeches of Rajapaksa should be a prime example to be followed by all budding and old leaders alike. If you don’t believe me, ask the Wattakka man, who got fame by dropping the last s in Rajapaksa some time back.
/
Dr Chanaka Wijesekera / December 16, 2015
What this country needs is legislation preventing politicians making statements which are absolute lies at media conferences etc. Such irresponsible acts must be stopped
/
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / December 16, 2015
Glancing through the name of the signatories, I am surprised they signed a document that is so myopic and monocular!
Dr,RN
/
bo / December 16, 2015
It says in Sinhala, even if one can build a fence round the country, one cannot build a fence round the tongue. How can legislation prevent people expressing themselves, albeit some in vicious ways, when the government is unable to prevent much greater crimes like mega corruption and political m, and abusive talk and intimidating behavior from uneducated and foolish MPs and Minsiters at the veru heart of legislative body, the parliament. This is a load of bunkum from educated busy bodies when there are so many more important things to do. Get real!
/
Sinhala veeraya / December 16, 2015
american-israel plan. My Muslim friend have asked for legislation against Gnanasara Thera. Where is the ACJU, MCSL, Shoora Council, YMMA, N M Ameen, Hilmy Ahamed, Faiz Mustapa? There are modern Muslims who have signed and the Muslims clergy will not call them muslims. The TNA doesnt want this act because they have plans to finish off the muslim in jaffna and mannar. Risard and Hakeem silent too.
/
mano1000 / December 22, 2015
People should be mindful of the realities in the modern world.
Specially, the Jihadist and the Tamil Nationalist using the hate speech as process of indoctrination. This was proven time after time in the past. Where were you goons when the innocent people were killed in busloads?
Where were you when these big bullies/Western countries who funded the Tamil Tigers and provided with Weapons and ammunition threaten Sri Lanka to show restrain after suicide attacks? Where were you when the diaspora groups lobbying to cripple the business and funds.
Where wer you when All Sri Lankans lost hope due to the Terrorism?
You have to nip it in the bud!
Even US and UK has over looking to these laws. CAn the British public request the information about the Arms deals to Saudi Arabia during the Blair Time? It is good to have the freedom of information and Independent Judiciary and Independent police commission but there has to be a media ethic committee. As a emerging Democracy we cannot take any chances and people can easily be manipulated? There aren’t many investigating journalists but Tabloid ambulance chases!
There has to be a panel who do diligence on important matters before the hell break free.
/