A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Sunday, April 21, 2019
Buddha’s Bulldogs Vs. The Cloud Dweller: The Strange Case Of Shakthika Sathkumara’s Ardha

Preface
“The hacked temple, in the flaccid sky, like a boil festers, uncircumcised
Underneath, the testes of the dagoba, the stupa of nuclear argot
The
moonstone studded kotha like a conical spired necklace of pearls, juts
out, its budding priapus of engorged veins, parts the innocuous and
fluffy, grunting beef curtains, and ejaculates into the blooming
vivisection of the sun’s glory-hole pate
O future! Rid us of this rot.” – A description of the Sambodhi Chaithya in Colombo 01 by the poet Ruwan Laknath Jayakody
Introduction
By arresting a short story writer for publishing alleged religiously
offensive content, and using domestic legislation enacted to enable the
enforcement of an international human rights instrument belonging to the
international bill of rights for the purpose, in order to appease the
histrionic self-righteous dictates of holy cows and their theocratic
orthodoxy of politically correct, anti-progressive, wholly regressive,
infallible majoritarianism, Sri Lanka has taken a transitional step from
libertarian democracy towards the conservative dystopia of Fahrenheit
451 and the extremism of medieval inquisitions, thereby reigniting the
fires of that age old debate on two oft conflicting rights – the freedom
of expression versus the freedom the religion.
The facts of the case
According to various news reports (electronic, online and print), Shakthika Sathkumara,
a 33-year-old father of two and award winning short story writer, also
employed as a Government servant (a Development Officer attached to the
Nikaweratiya Divisional Secretariat), was arrested by the Polgahawela
Police on 1 April after a group of Buddhist monks led by
Ahungalle/Angulugalle Siri Jinananda attached to the Buddhist
Information Centre, Deldeniye Rathanasara, Daluhenegedera Medankara,
Pallewela Rathanasara, Udugama Premananda and the Young Buddhist Defence
Front had complained to the Inspector General of Police (IGP) on 25
February over a work of fiction (short story) authored by Sathkumara
titled Ardha (Half/Partial), which was posted online on social media
(Facebook). The charge (trumped up?) brought against Sathkumara is
allegedly committing the offence of propagating or advocating religious
hatred that constituted an incitement to discrimination, hostility or
violence. The Internet Media Action (IMA) organization in a press
release issued in this regard claimed that the said Centre had also
requested the IGP to ban, under the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (the ICCPR is an international human rights instrument
to which Sri Lanka is a State Party to) Act, No. 56 of 2007, a soon to
be published short story collection by Sathkumara.
The complainant-plaintiffs claim, that the said story by the defendant
respondent, to which they object to, which dealt with among others
homosexuality among members of the Buddhist clergy, sexual abuse in
temples and a young monk disrobing and leaving the monastic order of the
Buddha Sasana following an act of apostasy and renunciation yet remains
non-heretical, was derogatory and defamatory to Buddhism and therefore
constituted an alleged insult to the Buddhist faith including the life
of the Buddha and the Sangha, and had thus taken offence to such.
Upon being produced before the Polgahawela Magistrate’s Court on 1
April, Sathkumara was subsequently remanded until 9 April by Polgahawela
Magistrate Nelum Priyadharshini under the ICCPR Act. On 9 April when
the case was taken up for hearing again, Sathkumara was ordered to be
placed further in remand custody till 23 April. Attorney Sarath Dassanayake had appeared for the complainant plaintiffs
while President’s Counsel (PC) Singhanathage Tharapathi Jayanaga had as
per a request by J.C. Weliamuna PC appeared for the defendant
respondent.
Dassanayake had on the date of trial claimed that Sathkumara through his
story had insulted Buddhism, the Buddha Sasana and the Buddhist clergy,
an allegation which Jayanaga PC had denied, claiming in turn that
nothing of the sort as alleged by the prosecution (alleged insult to the
Buddhist doctrine of beliefs) had occurred as a result of the said
artistic creation/production and that the religion in question had not
been insulted. The monks have submitted that the Facebook wall on which
the said story was posted had allegedly contained a semi naked image
which in turn was intended to offend the sentiments of Buddhists in
relation to the Buddha’s life as Siddhartha, a layman.
“In Court, whilst emphasizing that Sathkumara is neither a criminal nor a
murderer, we produced his educational qualifications and the relevant
portions of the books he has written and their contribution towards the
development of Buddhism. We also cited case law such as the judgment
given by Dr. R.B. Ranaraja when in a Kandy High Court case it was held
that Courts must not be arbiters of morals and that Courts should not be
rubberstamps to regulate unreasonable applications by the Police while
in Mahanama Tilakaratne v. Bandula Wickramasinghe, Senior Superintendent of Police And Others,
Justice Ranjith Dheeraratne held in relation to issuing a warrant that
such must not be issued by a Magistrate to satisfy the sardonic pleasure
of an opinionated investigator or prosecutor, and in Sebastian Fernando v. Katana Multi-Purpose Co-Operative Society Limited., And Others,
Justice Mark Fernando in relation to cases where two statutes are
involved, held that harsh laws must be narrowly interpreted and that the
interpretation which avoids the penalty must be preferred. In such a
context, Section 3(1) of the ICCPR Act is a harsher law when compared
with Section 291B of the Penal Code,” Jayanaga PC added. The defence is
presently pondering its next course of action in the form of filing an
application for bail and/or a revision application in the relevant High
Court. Dassanayake’s contact number could not be found by the author.
Meanwhile, Co-Convener of the Purawesi Balaya (Citizen’s Power) civil
society organization, Gamini Viyangoda announced that a Fundamental
Rights (FR) petition especially naming the Officer-In-Charge of the
Polgahawela Police Station as the first respondent will be filed by
Sathkumara in the Supreme Court with the involvement of a PC upon the
conclusion of the Court vacation period, which ends this week.
Applicable Legal Regime and Critical Analysis
Section 3(1) of the ICCPR Act states, among others, that no person shall
propagate or advocate religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, and if found guilty of attempting
to commit the said offence, the convict is liable to face a maximum
term of rigourous imprisonment of 10 years. Under this Act, bail can
only be granted by a High Court or a Court above the High Court level
and that too under exceptional circumstances, the latter which remains
undefined in the context of the Act, thus allowing for wide judicial
discretion.
Section 291A of the Penal Code holds that anyone who with the deliberate
intention of wounding the religious feelings of anyone, utters any
word, among others, commits an offence which if found guilty carries a
maximum term of imprisonment of a year and/or a fine while Section 291B
of the same deals with the deliberate and malicious intention of
outraging the religious feelings of any class of persons by words
written, insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs
of that class, and upon conviction carries a maximum term of
imprisonment of two years and/or a fine.
It must be noted that Article 10 of the Constitution guarantees the
freedom of thought and conscience (a short story is partly the product
of both) while the freedom of speech and expression including
publication (includes short stories) is enshrined in Article 14(1)(a).
Further, Article 14(1)(f) provides for the freedom to enjoy and promote
one’s own culture (short stories which fall within the realm of
literature are an aspect of culture) and use one’s language (the medium
in which the short story is written) while Article (14)(1)(g) allows one
to engage in a lawful occupation and profession (short story writing
and publishing falls within the scope of a lawful occupation and
profession).
Also, Article 14A(1) provides for the citizen’s right of access to
information which in turn is required for the exercise or protection of a
citizen’s right. As the author along with Faizer Shaheid previously
noted in their review of a draft Right to Information (RTI) bill, the
fact that every person shall have the right to hold opinions without
interference or subject to restriction and the right to freedom of
expression which shall include the freedom to express, seek, receive and
impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers,
either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through
any other media of choice, must be recognized within the context of
freedom of information.

