brand logo

Going to extremes against extremism

28 Sep 2021

  • The backlash over Gnanasara Thera's latest comments on national television
BY Sumudu Chamara Extremism is not a new term to Sri Lanka; the country has been dealing with various forms of extremism for decades. Even though the war waged by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the Easter Sunday terror attacks in 2019 are often viewed as the worst acts of extremism and terrorism on Sri Lankan soil, the country has also seen several clashes fuelled by extremist ideologies, and they have affected the growth of the people and the country significantly. Successive governments have made attempts to establish reconciliation and inter-ethnic and religious harmony over the past decade, especially after the end of the war in May 2009, but there remains a pressing concern as to how successful these attempts were, as ethnic tensions continue to exist between various communities and groups. However, what Sri Lanka is currently dealing with is not just extremism or inter-ethnic and religious divisions, but a combination of both.   Renewed dialogue on extremist attacks, extremism It is in this context that Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) General Secretary Ven. Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thera made several controversial statements during a recent television programme. During the said programme, he made statements about the possibility of an extremist attack similar to the Easter Sunday attacks in 2019 and stated that he was aware of the groups preparing to launch this attack. He also noted that he is able to prove these claims. His comments were largely focused on the Muslim community and extremism.  A number of parties including the Archdiocese of Colombo and the All Ceylon Jamiyyathul Ulama (ACJU) promptly responded to the claims made by Gnanasara Thera, urging the law enforcement authorities to take action to look into the veracity of these statements. Despite the controversial nature of Gnanasara Thera’s statements, on 22 September, Public Security Minister Rear Admiral (Retd.) Sarath Weerasekera said that Gnanasara Thera’s statements should be looked into thoroughly, adding that those statements had been made quoting certain parts of the Quran. Weerasekera added that as long as there are extremist ideologies in the society, terrorist attacks can happen at any time. In light of this series of events, Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) Opposition Parliamentarian Mujibur Rahuman sent a letter to Mass Media Minister Dullas Alahapperuma last week, expressing disapproval of Gnanasara Thera’s statements, which Rahuman claimed were racist remarks, being telecast. Rahuman criticised the statements made by Weerasekera in Parliament as well, alleging that these statements with regard to Gnanasara Thera’s comments were tantamount to supporting Gnanasara Thera and discrimination. He added: “In this case, the statements of the Minister in charge of the Police, who is tasked with implementing the law, are unacceptable, as he seems to be supporting Gnanasara Thera’s remarks. All these statements were made in a context where President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Foreign Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris have told the international community that Sri Lanka is looking into taking measures to establish reconciliation in the country. However, what the Minister in charge of the Police is doing is speaking in favour of extremist groups in Parliament.” He observed that this is a dangerous situation, claiming that appointing persons like Weerasekera to responsible positions such as managing the Police Department raises concerns. Although The Morning attempted to contact Minister Weerasekera to ascertain his standpoint, he was not reachable. Meanwhile, media reports claimed that a certain WhatsApp group, affiliated with the Islamic State (IS), was allegedly being used by certain parties to spread extremist ideologies.  However, despite growing concerns about extremism due to the said WhatsApp group, the Police said that the veracity of those claims has not been confirmed, and that the message shared on this WhatsApp group has been forwarded for further investigations. Police Media Spokesman Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Nihal Thalduwa further stated that therefore, there is no need to be alarmed.   Law and society Meanwhile, a number of Muslim MPs lodged complaints with Inspector General of Police (IGP) Chandana D. Wickramaratne, the Police Headquarters, and the Criminal Investigations Department (CID), demanding legal action against Gnanasara Thera’s statements. In addition to Rahuman, SJB MPs H.M.M. Harees, M.S. Thowfeek, Faizal Cassim, and Ishak Rahuman, All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) MP S.M.M. Muszhaaraff, and Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) MP Naseer Ahamed have filed complaints with the IGP and the CID. Speaking to the media regarding these complaints, activist and Attorney-at-Law (AAL), Senaka Perera, appearing for some of the complainants, stated that Gnanasara Thera’s comments were levelled against a community, and that at a time when investigations are being conducted with regard to the Easter Sunday attacks, the responsibility for the said statements should be taken by Gnanasara Thera.  Perera further said that in a context where the CID usually takes swift action even regarding a simple social media post, the Police not taking action against Gnanasara Thera’s statement is an unacceptable situation. “Gnanasara Thera’s statements were about the possibility of an attack, which is capable of raising concerns about a threat to people’s lives. If a person is aware of details with regard to an attack, such information must be revealed. Therefore, the complainants requested the IGP to look into the statements made by Gnanasara Thera and to take appropriate action,” Perera added. Perera told The Morning that the complaints were filed requesting that action be taken against Gnanasara Thera over the controversial statements the latter had made. He opined that making such statements about sensitive incidents (the Easter Sunday attacks), which caused the deaths of over 250 people, and using the same for political purposes, is utterly unacceptable. Perera further expressed concerns that such statements, which he claimed were hateful, irresponsible, and could affect the ongoing investigations into the Easter Sunday bombings. “If Gnanasara Thera is aware of any information to support his claims, what he should have done is not to make such statements, but to give that information to the law enforcement agencies in order to assist the ongoing investigations,” Perera opined. Meanwhile, speaking to The Morning, Rahuman also expressed similar opinions. Rahuman added that if Gnanasara Thera is aware of any information that substantiates the statements in question, the latter can give that information to the CID, since if there are extremist groups, the law should be enforced against such groups without question. “Instead of doing that, making statements targeting a particular religion and religious beliefs, and linking those statements to the Easter Sunday attacks, is unacceptable,” Rahuman opined. Perera also questioned the motive behind the statements made by Gnanasara Thera. “We feel that making such statements could be an attempt to mislead the ongoing investigations into the Easter Sunday attacks. Also, this could be an attempt to protect certain parties. We feel that by creating a wrong idea about extremism and spreading it in society, Gnanasara Thera is trying to obstruct the ongoing investigations into the Easter Sunday attacks, and to protect certain respondents of the case. We also have a question as to whether Gnanasara Thera made the statements in question of his own accord, or whether he is being led by someone.” Perera also noted that making statements of this nature about religious leaders is also a heavy blow to the people’s right to religion as well, and claimed that it is a violation of certain provisions regarding religious freedom coming under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act. He added that Gnanasara Thera’s statements could also be an offence under the Penal Code, as it could cause disharmony among the people.  The ICCPR Act No. 56 of 2007 prohibits any person from propagating war or advocating national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence.  “In reality, the statements in question are against a specific community, and therefore, action should be taken against Gnanasara Thera. Just because he is wearing a saffron robe, he is not entitled to immunity,” he added. When queried about the importance of the evidence or information that supports Gnanasara Thera’s statements coming to light, Perera said that during the investigations into the said statements, Gnanasara Thera will have to reveal that information to prove his claims. According to Perera, every citizen is bound to abstain from making false statements and thereby creating a background that supports criminal activity. Speaking of Gnanasara Thera’s statements being made on a prominent media channel, Perera said that the former must take responsibility for his statements, and that in practical terms, the media does not always have the ability to look into the veracity of statements made by certain parties when reporting. “However, as citizens, those who speak to the media are bound to make accurate statements that contribute to the people’s progression in a fair manner.” Speaking further about Gnanasara Thera’s statements, Rahuman expressed concerns that making misleading and hateful statements could, in fact, trigger extremism, if there are extremist elements. “Making such statements could create a new issue, instead of resolving the existing issues, and we have a question as to whether this is an attempt to create more extremists,” he told The Morning. Rahuman also pointed out that Gnanasara Thera keeps making statements of this nature in a context where even the final report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) appointed to look into the Easter Sunday attacks has said that the latter’s conduct has exacerbated extremism in the country, and has recommended enforcing the law against him. As Rahuman claimed, the final report had recommended that the Attorney General (AG) should look into whether a criminal case can be filed against Gnanasara Thera under the ICCPR Act, for speeches made in Aluthgama in June 2014 and February 2013. The Morning’s attempts to contact Gnanasara Thera to obtain his response to the allegations levelled against him and the nature of the information he has to support his claims, were unsuccessful.   Criticism in media  The veracity of Gnanasara Thera’s comments remains unknown as of yet. However, despite the controversial nature of the statements, a large part of the discussions revolving around them depends on assessing the truth in the allegations made by Gnanasara Thera. Sri Lanka recognises the freedom of speech and publication, which includes expressing opinions to the media freely and media telecasting such content freely, with only a few exceptions. In a landmark judgment delivered early this year, the Supreme Court (SC) upheld the freedom of press, after hearing two fundamental rights (FR) petitions filed by the then-Free Media Movement (FMM) Convener Uvindu Kurukulasuriya and a viewer of a live television programme against which the FR petitions were filed, named J.K.W. Jayasekara. The FR petitions had challenged an arbitrary action taken by the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation (SLRC) in 2008 to abruptly terminate the telecasting of a live television programme during which Kurukulasuriya spoke. The respondents of the petitions were the SLRC and some of the SLRC’s heads, the then Mass Media Minister, and the then AG. Highlighting the abrupt manner in which the telecasting of the said live programme was terminated, which, according to Kurukulasuriya, was caused by the nature of his statements, the SC ruled that provisions coming under Article 10 (thought, conscience, and religion), 12 (1) (equality and equal protection of the law), 12 (2) (freedom from discrimination), and 14 (1) (a) (freedom of speech and expression including publication) of the Constitution had been infringed, and ordered to pay compensation to the petitioners. The SC also highlighted the criticism in the media. Quoting the SC’s views expressed in Fernando vs. the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation and Others (1996) – “…the media asserts, and does not hesitate to exercise, the right to criticise public institutions and persons holding public office; while, of course, such criticism must be deplored when it is without justification, the right to make and publish legitimate criticism is too deeply ingrained to be denied” – the SC, in its judgment, said: “The media is not restrained from publicising or broadcasting criticism provided that such criticism is legitimate, and the objective of the criticism is not for one to obtain an undue advantage to the disadvantage of another.” The judges who heard the petitions further said: “In my view, the petitioner, in the exercise of the freedom of speech and expression, was making a legitimate criticism of a public figure. The petitioner did not denigrate the President in harsh words or resort to malicious comments about the President. I am of the view that his criticism of the President was neither character assassination nor defamatory. The respondents have not contested the facts presented by the petitioner regarding the repression of the media. As correctly held in Mallawarachchi vs. Seneviratne, Officer-In-Charge of the Kekirawa Police (1992) – “A true statement, made in the public interest or in the protection of a lawful interest, would be clearly in the exercise of the freedom of speech although ex facie defamatory. Such statements may be made by way of criticism of those holding or seeking public office, particularly where relevant to such office. Therefore, truth is a defence for defamation and even if the statement in question was defamatory, unless the falsity of the statement is proven or at the very least contested, neither the first respondent corporation nor this court can presumptively bar a citizen from exercising his rights, on the ground of defamation.” Now that law enforcement agencies have started looking into the statements made by Gnanasara Thera, it can be expected that the evidence he said he was in possession of would be exposed soon. However, it is important to understand all aspects of this matter that require attention and not just the alleged racist and discriminatory nature of the statements in question. While it is everyone’s right and responsibility to fight remarks that may trigger ethnic and religious disharmony, it is equally important to give priority to finding out the truth about these statements.


More News..