Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa has written to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena urging the postponement of the upcoming parliamentary debate on the Online Safety Bill.
The Second Reading of the Online Safety Bill is scheduled for January 23 and 24, as per a decision taken by the Committee on Parliamentary Business earlier this month.
In his letter, Premadasa pointed out that, if passed, the Bill would permit the proposed Online Safety Commission and the minister in charge of the subject to exercise unlimited powers, restricting the people’s right to freedom of speech and expression.
In other countries of the world, adequate time and an opportunity to create wide public space are given before bringing forth such Bills, the opposition leader said, alleging that the government has not followed such process when presenting the Online Safety Bill.
Instead of protecting the victims of online harassment, this Bill will only serve political interests, Premadasa said further.
The Online Safety Bill was published in the government gazette on September 18, 2023, aiming to ban online communication of certain statements in the country, prevent the use of online accounts – both authentic and inauthentic – for the use of prohibited purposes, to suppress the financing and other support of communication of false statements and other related matters.
However, the Bill has come under fire for some of its problematic aspects, with the Asia Internet Coalition (AIC) which consists of multiple tech giants including Apple, Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Yahoo, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) voicing concerns.
A total of 45 petitions had been put forward by Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), National People’s Power (NPP), journalist Tharindu Uduwaragedara and many other parties, alleging that the relevant bill is in violation of the fundamental rights of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution.
Later, the Supreme Court, after concluding the deliberation of petitions, communicated its determination on the constitutionality of the Bill and its provisions to President Ranil Wickremesinghe and Speaker Abeywardena, emphasizing that pursuant to Article 84(2) of the Constitution, Clauses 3, 5, 7, 9, 11,12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 42, 45, 53, and 56 should be passed by a special majority in the parliament. However, if these clauses are amended during the Committee Stage, the Online Safety Bill can be passed by a simple majority in the parliament, the Supreme Court’s determination read further.
