Monk MP's anti-conversion bill begins trek in

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001244

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR SA, SA/INS, DRL, DRL/IRF
NSC FOR E. MILLARD
PLEASE PASS TOPEC

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07-27-14
TAGS: PHUM PREL KIRF CE
SUBJECT: Monk MP's anti-conversion bill begins trek in
Parliament; Buddhist Affairs Minister's bill in draft

Refs: (A) Colombo 1070, and previous

(U) Classified by Ambassador Jeffrey J. Lunstead.
Reasons 1.5 (b,d).


1. (C) SUMMARY: A JHU MP presented a private member's
bill on anti-conversion to Parliament on July 21. This
began a many-month process of debate and legal editing
before a potential vote on the draft legislation by
Parliament. Several groups have already submitted
Supreme Court petitions challenging the JHU's bill. The
Buddhist Affairs Minister's own anti-conversion bill is
still in the midst of being drafted and may also take
several months before it could receive GSL-wide
approval. It would be presented to Parliament if the
Cabinet agrees on the draft bill. Both bills have a
long way to go before any eventual vote in Parliament,
treks likely made lengthier by the public and legal
debates which seem to continuously increase in volume.
END SUMMARY.

JHU anti-conversion bill in Parliament
--------------


2. (C) Ven. Omalpe Sobitha Thero, a Buddhist monk MP
from the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) party, presented a
draft "anti-conversion" bill to Parliament on July 21.
The bill had been officially gazetted (published) at the
end of May 2004 -- see Reftels. In a July 26 meeting
with poloff, the GSL's Legal Draftsperson Teresa Perera
explained the lengthy process that a private member's
bill must undergo before it potentially becomes law.
The formal July 21 presentation to Parliament was the
first step. Thereafter, the bill is taken up by a
ministry -- the Buddhist Affairs Ministry in this case -
- which then must report on it to Parliament. The bill
and the ministerial report are then forwarded to the
Legal Draftsperson's office, which evaluates the
constitutionality of the bill, edits it, and suggests
any appropriate amendments. The revised draft bill goes
through the Attorney General's office before being
presented to Parliament for the second reading and
debate. During the second reading, the Parliament
should come to consensus on the details of the bill and
any suggested changes or amendments. At the third
parliamentary reading of the bill, all changes should
have been incorporated and Parliament votes on the bill.
If it passes, it then becomes an Act of Parliament.


3. (C) Ms. Perera explained that while the whole
process can take as little as one month, given the
widely recognized public debate on this subject, it is
likely that it could take three to six months before
reaching Parliament for a vote. Even then, other
interlocutors have said that there are alternative
methods, including parliamentary procedural ones, to
keep the bill from getting to the floor for a vote.

Legal opposition to JHU bill begins
--------------


4. (C) Within seven days of the presentation of a
private member's bill in Parliament, the Constitution
allows opponents to file any legal challenges to the
proposed legislation. As of late July 26, several
groups had filed petitions against the draft JHU bill in
the Supreme Court with a few more petitions expected by
the July 27 deadline. The National Christian
Evangelical Alliance of Sri Lanka filed a petition, as
did their General Secretary who filed as a private
citizen. Among others, the Civil Rights Movement, the
National Christian Council, and the Center for Policy
Alternatives also have filed challenges to the bill.
There are additional individual petitions as well. The
Roman Catholic Church has not filed a petition, but it
is expected that either the church or noted figures
within the church will present such a petition by July

27. According to Ms. Perera, her office will await the
Supreme Court rulings on these petitions before
finalizing the draft bill and sending it to the Attorney
General for approval.

Ministerial anti-conversion bill in draft stage
-------------- --


5. (C) While the JHU bill was submitted to Parliament as
a private member's bill, the GSL is separately pursuing
its own official anti-conversion legislation. Ms.
Perera provided an update on the status of this bill,
which came to her office after Buddhist Sasana (Affairs)
Minister Ratnasiri Wickremenayake presented it to the
Cabinet on June 16. Elaborating, Ms. Perera said the
bill is being drafted by her office in conjunction with
the Buddhist Affairs Ministry. It would also go through
the Attorney General's office for approval before
returning to the Cabinet. Asked if the bill being
drafted was based on Wickremenayake's version, Ms.
Perera called that a "secret," stating it was
inappropriate for her office to comment on the content
of any bill being drafted.


6. (C) As with any government bill, Ms. Perera
explained that once the Cabinet is satisfied with the
draft legislation, it is then gazetted and presented to
Parliament. The final step of a government bill --
parliamentary presentation -- is the opposite of a
private member's bill, in which the reading in
Parliament comes first. Ms. Perera thought that the
government's anti-conversion bill could take two to
three months before reaching Parliament -- assuming it
receives Cabinet approval.


7. (C) Within the government, support for the bill is
divided. Wickremenayake is a proponent of the bill and
was recently quoted as saying such legislation was not
confined to (protecting) Buddhists and would "enhance
the freedom of worship of one's religion." Jeyaraj
Fernandopulle, Minister of Trade, Commerce, and Consumer
Affairs, has been equally vocal about his opposition to
the bill. While Christian Affairs Minister Milroy
Fernando expressed concern over the JHU anti-conversion
bill, he has not made public his views on the
ministerial bill.

Comment
--------------


8. (C) Both bills have a long way to go before any
eventual vote in Parliament. It seems each bill's trek
has been lengthened by the public and legal debates
which continuously increase in volume. Christian and
other groups have already opposed the JHU bill and are
likely to do the same with the ministerial bill when the
opportunity arises -- if it receives Cabinet approval
and is gazetted. There is no indication how the Supreme
Court might rule on the recently submitted objections to
the JHU bill. In the last two years, however, the
Supreme Court has ruled against Christian groups in
several cases, upholding Buddhism's "foremost place" in
the Constitution. Even if the bills survive legal
challenges, it is not clear if either will make it to
the floor of Parliament for a vote. Even if one or both
does, passage is not guaranteed, for several reasons.
The government does not have a majority, and would need
opposition votes. Moreover, the government itself is
divided, and some GSL MPs might vote against. The
position of the main opposition United National Party is
not yet clear.


9. (C) COMMENT Cont: President Kumaratunga has
personally told the Ambassador that she opposes such a
bill. Nonetheless, she is desperate to obtain a
majority in Parliament. If the price of JHU support for
her government -- which would give her that majority --
was her support for an anti-conversion bill, she might
be tempted. END COMMENT.

LUNSTEAD