SC says Online Safety Bill can be passed by simple majority subject to amendments 

Deputy Speaker Ajith Rajapakse  

The Supreme Court yesterday determined that the controversial Online Safety Bill tabled by the Government last month can be passed by a simple majority in parliament subject to 31 amendments. 

The determination of the court was informed to the house by Deputy Speaker Ajith Rajapakse at the commencement of yesterday’s parliamentary session. 

Accordingly Rajapakse referring to the Supreme Court’s determination, said that if the bill’s sections 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 42, 45, 53, and 56 undergo amendments during the committee stage, it can be approved with a simple parliamentary majority.

Among the provisions that require amendment are those relating to the prohibition of communicating false statements about events in Sri Lanka, communicating a false statement leading to contempt of court, inciting an uprising by a false statement, disturbing a religious meeting by a false statement, communicating a false statement with the express intention of hurting religious sentiments among others. 

Alternatively, he said as per section 84(2) of the constitution, the mentioned clauses of the draft bill must secure approval through a special majority in parliament.

The bill was challenged in the Supreme Court, over 40 petitions filed by various persons and groups after it was tabled in parliament.

The petitions were taken up by a three-member bench of the Supreme Court, composed of Justices Priyantha Jayawardena, Achala Wengappuli and Shiran Gunaratne.

The substantial number of necessary amendments has faced strong criticism, with numerous experts highlighting that it signifies a lack of careful consideration in the preparation of the bill.

Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella, in response to Rajapakse’s summary of the ruling, criticised the government for rushing the bill through the legislative process.

He expressed concerns about whether the bill had received sufficient discussion with the oversight committee and civil society groups. “The bill was hastily introduced, and now we see over 50 proposed amendments. When I first entered parliament, it was rare for more than one or two bill clauses to require amending,” the veteran politician remarked.