Supreme Court Takes Up 25 Petitions Against Anti-Terrorism Bill

The Supreme Court has begun considering 25 petitions challenging the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill, with lawyers raising concerns over detention powers, judicial oversight and possible restrictions on fundamental rights.

The petitions are being heard before Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena and Justices Achala Wengappuli and Sampath Abeykoon.

Additional Solicitor General Nerin Pulle, appearing for the Attorney General, informed court that 25 petitions had been filed against the Bill and that the Speaker’s Office had been notified.

Attorney Hijaz Hezbollah, representing several petitioners, argued that certain provisions could limit the powers of magistrates, particularly in relation to the release of suspects. He also questioned clauses dealing with detention orders and provisions allowing arrests by the armed forces and Coast Guard.

He further argued that some powers granted to the executive, including restrictions on access to certain areas, could affect constitutional rights.

President’s Counsel Ali Sabry, appearing for former minister Professor G.L. Peiris, said measures introduced in the interest of national security should also protect the rights of individuals. He raised concerns over the possibility of prolonged detention and provisions allowing authorities to restrict meetings, press conferences and other activities.

Sabry argued that such decisions should be subject to judicial supervision rather than being determined solely by the executive.

President’s Counsel M.A. Sumanthiran, appearing for other petitioners, said the proposed legislation retained several features of the existing Prevention of Terrorism Act and could affect personal liberty and judicial independence.

Pulle told court that the government did not intend to restrict freedom of expression through the Bill.

The Supreme Court hearing is continuing.