• Uses protection of women and girls as a guise to curtail the right to expression and dissent

The proposed Online Safety Bill (OSB) poses a great threat to the freedom of expression and will curtail the freedom of expression, particularly the expression of dissent through online platforms. The joint statement issued by women’s rights activists and women’s rights organisations states: “The OSB will embed a culture of the State harassment of online journalists and activists, artists, scholars, writers, trade unions, civil society organisations, including women’s groups, human rights defenders, professional organisations, and any citizen who dares to criticise the Government and disagree with its policies and governance. Not only the Fundamental Rights of speech, expression and access to information, but the right to claim them through the connected rights of the freedom of protest and association will be curtailed and destroyed by the State. The inevitable self-censorship of citizens and communities that can follow will embed authoritarian and dictatorial governance that has no respect for the sovereignty of the Sri Lankan people that is a foundational value in our Constitution”. 

One of the major arguments that the State parties and those who support the Bill uses is that this Bill aims to protect females and children who face gender-based violence (GBV) such as doxing (the act of revealing identifying information about someone online and circulating such to the public without the victim's permission) and revenge porn on online platforms. We argue and believe that the commission established through this Bill will not protect women and girls, and will only be used as a tool that will contribute to self-censorship in online platforms which is self-evident from the provisions listed in the proposed Bill. 

Another main concern is the lack of transparency and the absence of a consultative process in drafting this Bill. It raises concerns about the bona fides of the Government's intention to “protect women and children”.

The Police and other law-enforcement services are most often not accessible for women, girls, and people from the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning, and intersex (LGBTQI) community. Many of them have faced further harassment at the hands of these law enforcement authorities due to the prevailing social biases, gender norms, traditional attitudes, and ideologies. We believe that this commission that would be established through this Bill – just like many other systems and structures in this country – will not be accessible to women, girls, and people from the LGBTQI community. 

The existing provisions from the Penal Code, the Obscene Publications Ordinance, the Electronic Transactions Act and the Computer Crime Act address aspects of online gender-based violence (OGBV) and if fairly and appropriately exercised, they can protect victims of OGBV, yet, this has not been practically applicable in many cases due to the insensitivity and biases as well as the lack of necessary knowledge and resources of the law enforcement authorities. We strongly believe that a new commission is not needed to address GBV in online spaces. 

Strengthening the capacity of the law enforcement authorities and the Police through necessary gender sensitisation and creating standard operating procedures to deal with incidents of OGBV is an important step to address the prevalence of OGBV. Furthermore, necessary amendments to the Penal Code and the Computer Crime Act by adding components of gender into the Computer Crime Act will assist victims and survivors of OGBV to access justice.  

Most often, those that face OGBV are vulnerable women, children going to school and persons from the LGBTQI community. They are most often unable to access legal services because of their vulnerability and suffer in silence and the most immediate action that they wish for is the content to be taken off the online platform. The findings of the recent study on OGBV in Sri Lanka confirms this. The incidents that they face have grave consequences to their lives online and offline. In such situations, how practical is it for persons living in rural parts of the country and young children facing OGBV to approach the commission through a written complaint or an electronic complaint? The provisions of the Bill may create a situation where Police officers may refuse to take complaints from women and other persons facing OGBV and ask them to take the matter to the commission, and this process will be longer and lead to these persons facing further harassment and violence online until the commission takes up the case. 

Another important need when dealing with any incident of GBV or OGBV is confidentiality and the need for psychosocial support. A holistic approach and coordination between the law-enforcement authorities, the Ministry of Women and Child Affairs and the other relevant stakeholders is important to address OGBV and this commission established through this Bill will not in any way guarantee this level of protection of care and support along with justice for survivors of OGBV. 

As activists working with women, girls, and persons who have various gender identities who face OGBV, we strongly believe that the statements made about this Bill being introduced to support and protect those who are affected by revenge porn, doxing and other forms of GBV is a cover that the Government is using to curtail the freedom of expression and the right to dissent of the citizens of Sri Lanka. 

“We are still suffering the impact of repressive laws of the past, enacted in the name of national defence, stability, economic growth, and development. What the Government needs to do is to learn from the past and engage in enlightened law-making. That agenda must repeal repressive laws and respond to embedded corruption, foster national unity and equitable economic growth that benefits all citizens in our plural society. The Government’s intention in passing laws that violate the basic values of democratic governance in our Constitution, shows that they want to change course, and establish a political dictatorship. The pretext is debt restructuring and economic recovery from bankruptcy”. 

We strongly reflect these feelings and sentiments expressed in the statement made by the women’s groups and call upon the Government to withdraw this Bill and take measures to repeal and amend the existing laws and employ a comprehensive gender analysis in the process. 

(Arulpragasam is a feminist activist at Delete Nothing that works on OGBV and female bodily autonomy while Palihawadana is an attorney-at-law and feminist activist who works for Hashtag Generation which is a tech savvy youth-led organisation)

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication.