Sri Lanka enforces a controversial internet safety law

Sri Lanka’s draconian law to regulate online content has come into force, in a move rights groups say is aimed at stifling freedom of speech.

The Online Safety Act gives a government commission board powers to assess and remove “prohibited” content.

Authorities say this law will help fight cybercrime, but critics have said it suppresses dissent ahead of the presidential elections that are scheduled to take place later this year. 

Social media had a key role in protests during the 2022 economic crisis which lead to the then president Gotabaya Rajapaksa being ousted as protesters stormed his residence.

The act was passed on the 24th of January by 108 votes to 62 and officially came into effect yesterday which has led to riots outside parliament.

The wide-ranging law prohibit “false statements about incidents in Sri Lanka”, statements with “an express intention of hurting religious feelings” and the misuse of bots, among other things.

A five-member commission appointed by the president will be given powers to assess these statements, to direct their removal, and to impose penalties on the people who made those statements.

The legislation will also make social media platforms liable for messages on their platforms.

Publicity Security Minister Tiran Alles, who introduced the draft legislation in parliament, said it was necessary to tackle offences associated with online fraud and statements that threaten national stability.

He also made note of over 8,000 complaints related to cybercrimes were filed last year.

A Sri Lankan pro-democracy group said yesterday that the government’s “adamant pursuit” of the legislation was a “clear indication of its intention to silent dissent and suppress civic activism” as the country was still reeling from the consequences of its worst economic crisis.

Food prices and inflation have reached record levels since the country declared bankruptcy in April 2022 with more than $83bn in debt. 

Thyagi Ruwanpathirana, the group’s regional researcher for South Asia said: “While the citizens silently suffer amidst escalating cost of living and unmanageable hunger, it is crucial for the rulers to recognise that this silence does not equate to obedience… It is the precursor to a major backlash against the government’s coercive rule.”

Rights group Amnesty International said the act’s broad provisions and vague wording would restrict people’s rights to freedom of expression and privacy online.

“It is the newest weapon in the government’s arsenal of tools that could be used to undermine freedom of expression and suppress dissent.”

Last October, the UN’s human rights office raised concerns against the draft law saying that it would give authorities “unfettered discretion to label and restrict expressions they disagree with as ‘false statements.”