PTA by another name, and a familiar democratic failure

PTA by another name, and a familiar democratic failure

By Ceylon Today -January 1, 2026

Sri Lanka has been here before — often, and at great cost. Each time the language of national security has been used to justify exceptional laws; democratic safeguards have weakened, public trust has frayed, and ordinary citizens have borne the consequences. The proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism (PSTA) Bill threatens to entrench that legacy rather than end it, despite repeated assurances that the long-reviled Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) would finally be abolished.

The letter submitted recently by 33 academics, journalists, social activists, and civil society members to Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara gives voice to a concern that has been steadily gathering momentum. Their description of the Bill as ‘PTA+’ is not rhetorical excess, but a considered assessment grounded in Sri Lanka’s own experience of emergency lawmaking. It reflects a growing fear that the Government is seeking to preserve, and even expand, the architecture of repression under a more palatable title.

Sri Lankan president signs PTA
order of Muslim man as rights groups
condemn arrest Apr 7, 2025

For more than four decades, the PTA has remained among the most discredited laws in Sri Lanka’s statute books. Enacted in 1979 as a temporary measure and made permanent in 1982, it enabled prolonged detention without charge, eroded judicial oversight, and fostered conditions that allowed torture, enforced disappearances, and arbitrary arrests. These violations were not incidental, but flowed from a legal framework that privileged executive power over constitutional safeguards, as repeatedly documented by local rights groups, UN bodies, and foreign governments.

Successive administrations acknowledged these failures, at least in principle, with repeated pledges to reform or abolish the law, particularly after the war. The present Government went further, explicitly committing to repeal the PTA — a promise reaffirmed by Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara in Parliament in January and again before civil society in May. It is against this unambiguous record that the proposed PSTA Bill must be assessed.

The substance of the proposed Bill justifies the concern it has generated. By reportedly expanding the definition of terrorism to encompass acts and expressions that may overlap with protest, dissent, and critical speech, it risks criminalising core democratic activity. When coupled with enhanced surveillance powers and access to private communications and financial information, the danger is clear. In a country where national security laws have repeatedly been used against journalists, activists, trade unionists, and minorities, these risks are real, not speculative. The manner in which the Bill has been advanced is equally troubling. Legislation of such breadth demands public consultation, rigorous parliamentary scrutiny, and a transparent justification. Instead, the Government appears to be acting with undue haste, denying citizens a meaningful debate on whether a specialised anti-terror law is even necessary. As the signatories note, existing criminal law already addresses violence, conspiracy, and organised crime without undermining fundamental rights. The call for a white paper is therefore responsible, not obstructive. If a new framework is truly required, the Government must explain its necessity, identify gaps in current law, and demonstrate compliance with constitutional and international human rights standards — while also accounting for the repeated delay in repealing the PTA.

That these warnings come from academics, senior journalists, human rights advocates, and former PTA detainees lend them particular weight. Their concerns are grounded in lived experience as much as legal principle.

At a time when Sri Lanka speaks of democratic renewal, the choice it makes on national security law will be a defining test. Replacing the PTA with a broader version under another name would represent continuity, not reform, reinforcing the perception that repression is merely being repackaged.

If the Government is serious about breaking with the past, it must begin by keeping its word. That means withdrawing the PSTA Bill, repealing the PTA, and engaging in an open, inclusive discussion about security that does not subordinate liberty to executive power. Anything less will confirm that Sri Lanka has learnt little from its own history — and is once again prepared to repeat it.