Attempt To Incite Religious Hatred

The destroyed Buddhist shrine room

It was reported that the camp, established after the war victory in 2009, does not exist in that location at present. The shrine room had been constructed at the time for religious observances of STF personnel. The Police said the Buddha statue has also been broken to pieces and therefore they have commenced investigations into the incident.

Nagananda Kodituwakku speaking to The Sunday Leader said that there are legal provisions in place if a statue or religious temple is to be removed. The matter should be brought to the attention of the public before it can be removed from the place in question.

He also said that the act of destroying the replica of the Lord Buddha by certain unidentified anti-social elements was an attempt to stir religious unrest in the country. Kodituwakku said that the entire Buddhist community in the country including him was dismayed, disturbed, and irritated by the degrading treatment meted out to the teachings of the Lord Buddha, probably to perturb the hard won peace, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of precious lives belonging to all communities inclusive of the members of  the armed forces and LTTE separatists.

There is statute in place to deal with such situations to bring such anti-social elements that thrive on inciting racism to justice. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Act, popularly known as ICCPR Act No 56 of 2007. This law provides necessary power to deal with such anti-social elements that advocate national, racial or religious hatred that constitute incitement or discrimination, hostility or violence to justice.

“Whoever violates this law vested upon the constitution should be brought before law and should have action action against them,” protested Kodituwakku. This Act may be cited as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act, No. 56 of 2007.

The law reads as, Every person shall have the right to recognition as a person before the law and No person shall propagate war or advocate national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. Nevertheless, he also went on to say that during the last Presidential election Mahinda Rajapaksa declared that the majority of his voters were Sinhalese and that his defeat was solely a result of the ‘terrorists’ supporting the main opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena. This assertion is grossly unfounded and uncalled for, as it has been intended to provoke controversy and racism amongst the communities. Surely, the law enforcement agencies and electronic media should have the footage of his utterances made in public. Even during the Presidential Election Campaign  in 2015, people witnessed his extremely disturbing racist remarks directed at ethnic minorities, particularly against Tamils and Muslims, inciting racism, with intention of swinging the majority Sinhalese voters towards him, which really worked for him but lost the election due to overwhelming rejection of his policies by ethnic minorities.

The people rejected him mainly for two reasons; ‘divide and rule’ doctrine adopted by him and also for his blatant failure to observe the rule of law, undermining the independence of the Judiciary, whilst condoning government corruption in an unimaginable scale.

Surely people in this country have experience of divide and rule policy, which cost this country tens of thousands of precious lives of youth  that belong to all communities. Therefore, surely, people of this island nation are not prepared to tolerate racism adopted not just by Sinhalese failed politicos, but also by politicos representing ethnic minority groups, Kodithuwakku further stated.

Section 3 of this law provides that every person who, attempts to commit, aids or abets in the commission of or threatens to commit any such act a punishable criminal offence with a punishment of ten years rigorous imprisonment.

This law, whilst recognising the importance of promoting harmony amongst all communities vests necessary jurisdiction in the High Court to try cases brought under this law, with priority given over any other business of the court and also to conduct the trial on a day to day basis with no postponements, unless due to any unavoidable circumstances.

The ICCPR Act No. 56 of 2007 reads as follows, (3) A person found guilty of committing an offence under subsection (1) or subsection (2) of this section shall on conviction by the High Court, be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.

(4) An offence under this section shall be non-bailable, and no person suspected or accused of such anoffence shall be enlarged on bail, except by the High Courtin exceptional circumstances.

(5) A trial in the High Court against any person for the commission of an offence under this section shall be taken up before any other business of that Court and shall be held on a day to day basis and shall not be postponed, unless due to any unavoidable circumstances, which shall be recorded.

“And therefore, action taken against such elements shall also include the Northern Province Chief Minister C.V Wigneshwaran, who also abuses the authority to make disparaging remarks against the community that respects and practices the philosophy taught by the Lord Buddha to mankind that completely rejects violence in any form except love care and compassion to all beings, Kodithuwakku stressed.