There has been significant political controversy surrounding the President’s decision to impose emergency regulations. Before 24 hours had elapsed after the disaster occurred, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa was the first to inform the President that, in order to manage the disaster, emergency regulations should be enforced under the Disaster Management Act passed in 2005. Although the President initially showed some reluctance, he proceeded to declare a state of emergency after realizing the scale and seriousness of the disaster.
However, the issue that has now arisen is that the President imposed emergency regulations not under the Disaster Management Act, but under the Public Security Act. This situation came to light following a statement made by Deputy Minister of Public Security Sunil Watagala at a meeting with senior police officers. While Deputy Minister of Mass Media Kaushalya Ariyarathne was present, Watagala instructed the police officers that the President’s actions were being heavily criticized on social media and that those responsible should be arrested under the emergency regulations.
This statement by Watagala has sparked strong opposition, and it can be seen that the matter has even reached the international arena.
Perhaps due to an understanding of the seriousness of Watagala’s remarks, the President addressed Parliament last Friday, after the budget was passed, stating that the emergency regulations would not be used to suppress the people or to restrict freedom of expression. Although the President made this assurance, there appears to be some truth in what Watagala said. This is because by declaring emergency regulations under the Public Security Act rather than the Disaster Management Act, there is room for such arrests to take place.
Accordingly, the key question now is: despite the Disaster Management Act clearly outlining the relevant provisions, who advised the President to impose emergency regulations under the Public Security Act instead? As a result, there is growing suspicion among many, and discussions are taking place in certain political circles, that a legal expert from the opposition met with the President and advised him to impose emergency regulations under the Public Security Act.
There is also suspicion among many in the opposition as to whether this legal expert, who represents the opposition, meets the President from time to time to provide such advice. It has been reported that discussions regarding this matter took place within the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) last week as well. According to information received by the “State Secrets” column, there is a possibility that a special statement regarding this opposition legal expert may be made in Parliament in the coming days.
