Sri Lanka could finally achieve its dream of becoming like Singapore

Just not in the way you’d imagine

On October 3, 2023 Sri Lanka's Public Security Minister presented to Parliament the Online Safety Bill, a Bill the government says is aimed at making the digital space – a safe space for Sri Lankans. 

Several media outlets have already interpreted this bill as a piece of legislation that will protect netizens, especially children from dangerous online activity. But not everyone agrees.

When the Bill was presented to Parliament, members of the opposition expressed their strong disagreement with MP. Prof G. L. Peiris even questioned the timing of the Bill. President Ranil Wickremesinghe meanwhile has said that this bill is inevitable as globally countries are introducing laws which aim to regulate online activity. 

Which is actually true. 

However, critics have come out with the strongest objections, stating that this is an effort by the government to stifle free speech. They have also pointed out that this bill has been drafted without meaningful consultations, to which the government responded saying that it was drafted in 2016, by the Law Commission. 

The Bill is also viewed as an attempt to suppress dissent. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has even requested the government to reconsider the timing of this controversial bill, saying that it is likely to jeopardize freedom of speech and expression. 

Human Rights Defenders aren't of course the only ones who are concerned. 

The Asia Internet Coalition – whose membership includes global tech giants such as Apple, Google and Facebook – is concerned that the Sri Lanka Government is moving the Online Safety Bill without undertaking any stakeholder consultation.

Many provisions in this bill appear to be styled after a controversial Singaporean law called the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act, better known as POFMA. 

Even in Singapore the first use of POFMA was directed towards a member of the opposition party, ordering the opposition politician to correct a Facebook post. 

The second time it was used was over a facebook post by an alternative news website, whose editor was based in Australia. The Singaporean law however provides little recourse for this kind of situation. The Sri Lankan law if implemented will see that even foreign service providers could also be held accountable. 

What does that mean?

This bill hopes to see a commission appointed by the President which would arbitrate on the truth. 

In other words, this Commission would decide what a prohibited statement or an online falsehood is, within 24 hours, ordering to prevent the online communication of this message. 

Experts agree that realistically speaking, this just won't be possible. Which is why MP Harsha de Silva has warned that this piece of legislation is a big risk. 

Many have voiced their concerns, stressing that this bill is completely needless and therefore should be withdrawn. And this includes the former President of the Bar Association Saliya Peiris. 

Our ability to fight online falsehoods becomes even more important, especially as Sri Lanka gears up for elections. But is this the way to go? The debate will go on. Watch this space for more updates.