IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

1. Centre for Policy Alternatives, No. 6/5, Layards Road, Colombo 05.

2. Dr. Paikiasoothy Saravanamuttu, No. 3, Ascot Avenue, Colombo 05.

Petitioners in SC/FR/91/2021 Sithara Shreen Abdul Saroor, No. 202, W.A. Silva Mawatha, Colombo 06.

Petitioner in SC/FR/106/2021 Ambika Satkunanathan, No. 27, Rudra Mawatha, Colombo 06.

Petitioner in SC/FR/107/2021 SC/FR/91/2021 SC/FR/106/2021 SC/FR/107/2021 Vs.

1. Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12.

2. Major General (retd) G.D.H. Kamal Gunaratne, Secretary, Ministry of Defence, No. 15/5, Baladaksha Mawatha, Colombo 03.

3. C.D. Wickramaratne, Inspector General of Police, Police Headquarters, Colombo 1.

4. Major General Dharshana Hettiarachchi, Commissioner General of Rehabilitation, Bureau of Commissioner General of Rehabilitation, No. 462/2, Kaduwela Road, Ganahena, Battaramulla.

Respondents

1. Dr. Malkanthi Hettiarachchi, 7A, De Soyza Mawatha, Mt. Lavania.

2. Al Haj Abdul Jawad Alim Ualiyallah Trust & Maulavee K.R.M. Sahlan Rabbane, B.J.M. Road, Kattankudy 05.

Intervenient-Respondents Before: Buwaneka Aluwihare, P.C., J.

Murdu N.B. Fernando P.C., J. Mahinda Samayawardhena, J.

Counsel: Viran Corea with Luwie Ganeshathasan, Khyati Wikramanayake and Thilini Vidanagamage for the Petitioners in SC/FR/91/2021.

Suren Fernando with Khyati Wikramanayake for the Petitioners in SC/FR/106/2021.

Pulasthi Hewamanna with Harini Jayawardhana, Fadhila Fairoze and Githmi Wijenarayana for the Petitioners in SC/FR/107/2021.

Nerin Pulle, P.C., Additional Solicitor General, with Dr.

Avanti Perera, Deputy Solicitor General for the Respondents.

Suren Gnanaraj with Rashmi Dias Goonewardena for the

1st Intervenient-Respondent.

Shehan De Silva with Naveen Maha Arachchige for the 2nd Intervenient-Respondent.

Argued on: 21.03.2022, 13.05.2022, 18.05.2023, 05.06.2023, 28.06.2023 Written Submissions:

By the Petitioners in SC/FR/91/2021 on 09.08.2022 and

03.08.2023 By the Petitioners in SC/FR/106/2021 on 15.03.2022 and

26.07.2023 By the Petitioners in SC/FR/107/2021 on 15.03.2022 and

31.07.2023 By the Respondents on 19.07.2023 By the 2nd Intervenient-Respondent on 14.03.2022 and

15.08.2023 By the 1st Intervenient-Respondent on 15.03.2022 and

23.10.2023 Decided on: 13.11.2023 Samayawardhena, J.

Introduction The petitioners filed these fundamental rights applications (SC/FR/91/2021, SC/FR/106/2021 and SC/FR/107/2021) in their own right and in the public interest on the basis that several fundamental rights guaranteed under Chapter 3 of the Constitution are violated by the Prevention of Terrorism (De-radicalization from holding violent extremist religious ideology) Regulations No. 1 of 2021 published in the Extraordinary Gazette No. 2218/68 dated 12.03.2021.

All three applications were supported together and the Court granted leave to proceed to the petitioners on the alleged violation of Articles 10, 12(1) and 13 of the Constitution. The Court also made an interim order suspending the operation of the said Regulations until the final determination of these applications.

Two petitioners were allowed to intervene. They are opposing the applications of the petitioners.

Arguments were taken up together and parties agreed to abide by a single judgment.

As stated in the Gazette, these Regulations were made by the President under section 27 of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act No. 48 of 1979 read with paragraph (b) of Article 4 of the Constitution.

The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents submitted to Court that the primary purpose of promulgating these Regulations was the de-radicalization and rehabilitation of the misguided youth who either surrendered or were arrested following the horrific Easter Sunday attacks on 21.04.2019, driven by a violent extremist religious ideology.

While these fundamental rights applications were pending, the Bureau of Rehabilitation Bill was placed on the Order Paper of Parliament on