Saliya Pieris PC warns proposed organised crimes law could enable arbitrary arrests, raises concerns over detention powers, bail restrictions and admissibility of police-recorded confessions
By The Pulseline News Desk
Former Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) President, Saliya Pieris PC has warned that the proposed Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill could expose ordinary citizens to arbitrary arrests and prolonged detention, questioning whether its safeguards are sufficient to prevent the misuse of police powers.
Responding to Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara’s explanation of the proposed legislation in Parliament on Tuesday (20), Pieris has challenged the Government’s assurances that provisions referring to tattoos, clothing and other identifying characteristics would not criminalise ordinary personal appearance.
He has questioned who would determine, at the point of arrest, whether a person’s tattoos or clothing resembled those associated with organised criminal groups, arguing that such decisions would initially rest with police officers exercising extensive powers under the proposed law. “Who decides at the point of arrest whether the tattoo or clothes are similar to those used by criminal groups?” Pieris has asked.
His concerns have brought the proposed legislation’s arrest and detention provisions into focus, particularly the extent of executive and police authority and the safeguards available to people accused of involvement in organised crime.
Dispute over tattoos and clothing
Justice Minister Nanayakkara had rejected claims that the Bill would allow people to be arrested simply for having tattoos, long hair or particular styles of clothing.
The Minister has explained that the relevant provisions concerned characteristics associated with known members of organised criminal groups and were intended to help identify membership of such organisations rather than criminalise personal appearance.
He has also said the provision concerning clothing, hand signals and tattoos was modelled on Singapore’s organised crime legislation.
However, Pieris has argued that the Minister’s explanation did not adequately address how the provisions would operate in practice, particularly when police officers had to decide whether an individual’s appearance justified action under the proposed law.
He has warned that the interpretation of such characteristics at the point of arrest could have serious consequences for individuals if the law did not provide adequate safeguards against arbitrary decisions.
Detention without judicial authorization
Pieris has also raised concerns over provisions that, according to his interpretation of the Bill, would allow the relevant ministry secretary to issue detention orders at the request of the Inspector General of Police (IGP) or a Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG).
He has said such orders could permit suspects to be detained for up to two months without judicial authorisation, with detention potentially extending to one year under the proposed framework.
The former BASL president has also questioned the treatment of suspects produced before a magistrate under the legislation.
According to Pieris, the proposed provisions could leave magistrates with no discretion but to remand suspects, even where questions remained about the sufficiency of the material presented by the police. “If the police say the tattoo or clothing concerned is that of an organised criminal group and produces the person under this law, the Magistrate will have to remand,” he has said.
He has further pointed out that suspects would have to seek bail from the High Court, potentially increasing the financial and legal difficulties faced by ordinary citizens.
The concerns raise questions about the balance between giving law enforcement agencies the powers needed to investigate organised crime and ensuring that suspects retain access to judicial oversight and effective legal remedies.
Warning over police-recorded confessions
Pieris has also criticised provisions that would allow confessions recorded by police officers to be admitted as evidence in court.
He has warned that permitting such confessions to be used as evidence could create conditions conducive to torture, coercion and other forms of abuse during investigations.
Drawing on Sri Lanka’s experience with security legislation, he has recalled that members of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) had faced torture, abuse and prolonged detention under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and Emergency Regulations.
He has argued that the history of the PTA, Emergency Regulations and the ICCPR Act demonstrated the risks associated with laws that grant extensive powers to state authorities without sufficient safeguards. “Those who are trying to justify this new Bill as being a necessity must recall how the PTA, the Emergency Regulations, the ICCPR Act and other laws have been abused under successive governments and the untold suffering and harm it has caused to people,” he has said.
Pieris has cautioned that the consequences of such legislation could extend beyond its stated purpose if the powers it introduced were subsequently used against people who were not involved in organised criminal activity.
Questions over drafting and consultation
The former BASL president has also questioned the process through which the Bill had been prepared, saying that, to his knowledge, it had not been drafted by the Ministry of Justice and had not undergone public consultation.
His criticism adds a further dimension to the debate over the proposed legislation, with concerns extending beyond individual provisions to the process of drafting laws that could significantly affect personal liberty and criminal justice procedures.
Public consultation and scrutiny by legal professionals, civil society organisations and other stakeholders are particularly important when legislation proposes expanded arrest and detention powers, as these processes can help identify potential abuses and weaknesses in existing safeguards.
Pieris has said those familiar with the misuse of security legislation under successive governments would recognise the risks associated with granting extensive powers to law enforcement authorities.
Bill enters parliamentary process
The Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill was presented to Parliament for its first reading on October 20, but it has not yet become law.
The Government has defended the proposed legislation as a measure intended to address organised criminal activity, while the concerns raised by Pieris focus on whether the powers proposed are sufficiently defined and subject to independent oversight.
The central issue is whether the Bill can provide law enforcement agencies with effective tools to tackle organised crime without creating opportunities for arbitrary arrests, detention without adequate judicial scrutiny or the abuse of investigative powers.
As the legislative process continues, the provisions governing identification, detention, remand, bail and the admissibility of confessions are likely to remain central to the debate over the Bill’s implications for civil liberties and the rule of law.
Leave a comment