The PSTA, POC and the NPP

By Kassapa

Weeks after being battered by the opposition over the 22nd Amendment but nevertheless seeing it through Parliament, the National Peoples’ Power (NPP) government ran into another legal stumbling block, the Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA) Bill and the Prevention of Organised Crime (POC) Bill which together, they hoped will replace the notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).

The PTA is an archaic piece of legislation. It was introduced nearly fifty years ago in 1978, when J.R. Jayewardene was President and was at the height of his powers. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and other armed groups were just emerging, and it was meant to crush them. Of course, it didn’t and a thirty-year war followed. Now, seventeen years after the war against terror ended, the PTA is still on our statute books.

The PTA has been used and abused by many a government to harass their political opponents. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, the major partner in the NPP alliance has been at its receiving end many a time. This is why President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, while campaigning in 2024, promised to abolish it if he were to come to power. This was one of the key campaign pledges of the NPP.

The time had now come to keep that promise. What has been offered instead is a combination of the PSTA and the POC. If enacted together, they could be more draconian than the PTA. This is because the POC lists a series of offences – even copy rights violations and reporting of criminal proceedings- that could fall under its ambit for which a suspect could be detained without bail and without being produced in courts for a significant period of time. Anyone could be at the mercy of a vengeful Police force and that is not uncommon even under an NPP government, as recent deaths in custody have shown.

Civil rights groups and activists were aghast. How could they, was the question being asked in those circles. How could a political party which claimed to value civil liberties, resort to this? Dozens of petitions to the Supreme Court followed. In many respects, this was of greater significance than the 22nd Amendment.

While some ruling party politicians, Sunil Watagala for instance, promised to implement the new laws, Dissanayake was cautious. If there were clauses that infringed on democratic rights, the government was prepared to repeal them, he told a public rally. He made specific mention of reducing the period of detention from 72 hours to 48 hours.

It was during the Supreme Court hearings on the petitions against the PSTA and the POC that the government’s intentions became clearer. It was willing to repeal many of the provisions considered offensive, Solicitor General Viraj Dayaratne, who represented the Attorney General, informed the court. The court adjourned, advising counsel for the petitioners to prepare a list of the clauses that they would prefer to have repealed. This is now with the Attorney General.

On the grapevine, it is being mentioned that the government will take a step backwards. It is keen not to rush the legislation through Parliament, despite having a two-thirds majority. It is prepared to wait for some time, until viewpoints opposing the news laws are heard and the issues they raise and remedied.

That is all well and good and how a democracy should function, one might say. At long last, we have a government that listens to public opinion and responds accordingly. Isn’t that what a majority of the population voted for? It is tempting to agree with that sentiment but a few pertinent questions remain.

Was the government that ignorant that the proposed Bills were more draconian than the PTA? In fact, President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva, during his submissions to the Supreme Court, said it was. “Someone has deceived the President into agreeing to this legislation”, he said. If this is indeed the case it reflects rather poorly on the President, the government and its advisors.

Admittedly, it is not Dissanayake who drafts these laws and he is no legal expert. However, what were his legal advisors doing? Didn’t they see the avalanche of protests coming? One does not have to be a G.L. Peiris to deduce that the proposed laws are draconian, a simple reading of the Bills would suffice.

This is not the first instance that the government was caught in this kind of dilemma. The educational reforms to the school curriculum imploded when a link to a website inappropriate for school children was detected in a key document. The reforms were then withdrawn; the baby was thrown out with the bathwater.

On the other hand, there is a school of thought that the government simply couldn’t have been that ignorant and was testing the waters with the PSTA and the POC. If there were no protests, the legislation would proceed; if there were, it could be scaled down. Some sceptics believe this is indeed the case because the political leadership of the NPP could not have been so naïve as to not know the impact of the contents of the PSTA and the POC.

If indeed the government was genuine in its intentions and then withdrew the proposed laws when they realised that they have overstepped the mark, that is commendable. Many familiar with the workings of this government believe this is the case. If so, full marks for sincerity but zero marks for efficiency- and that has been a recurring theme of this government.

Pause for a moment to consider the opposition’s response to all this. There were some muted protests but that was only a fraction of the din they made against the 22nd Amendment. There were no joint press conferences, no rallies to educate the public. Now, that certainly was not due to ignorance.

The opposition knows exactly what it is doing. They are quite happy for the PSTA and the POC to pass, as it is. They believe that although they may be in the opposition, it is only a matter of time before they are in government- and wouldn’t these laws come in handy to harass your opponents then? This is why the NPP still enjoys more public confidence than its rivals- they remain the relative best out of a bad lot!