TWO RELIGIOUS "ANTI-CONVERSION" BILLS, TOO MUCH

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 000742 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR SA/INS, DRL/IRF E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/20/2015 TAGS: PHUM KIRF CE SUBJECT: TWO RELIGIOUS "ANTI-CONVERSION" BILLS, TOO MUCH CONFUSION REF: A. COLOMBO 648 ¶B. COLOMBO 572 Classified By: DCM James F. Entwistle. Reason 1.4(b,d). ¶1. (C) Summary: The government's anti-conversion legislation is ready for Parliament but must be formally published before it can be presented to the legislative body. There is no timeframe to formally publish the bill. The private member Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) bill will likely come before Parliament on May 6, but must complete legislative steps before reaching a vote. Mission continues to encourage all parties to initiate dialogue on the issue, focusing on the tensions caused by so-called "unethical conversion," instead of focusing on legislative prohibitions. End Summary. The Government's Bill -------------- ¶2. (C) With Parliament in recess and many government officials out of town on extended holiday, most interlocutors are unsure of the status of the Government of Sri Lanka's (GSL's) draft legislation on anti-conversion (Ref B). Earlier reports indicated that the GSL bill would be on the parliamentary agenda for May 6, but in more recent conversations with parliamentary officials reveal that the bill is not/not on the docket for the May 3-6 session. (Note: The agenda for the next session after that, May 17-20, has not yet been finalized.) Moreover, the government's bill has not been "gazetted" (officially published),a formality required before it can be presented in Parliament. An April 20 call to officials at the Government Printing Office confirmed that the bill has not been published. (Note: The Constitution requires that a government bill must be gazetted seven day prior to a first reading in Parliament. End note.) ¶3. (C) If the GSL bill ever reaches the stage of a parliamentary vote, the government may request voting by secret ballot. This is not typical for the Sri Lankan SIPDIS Parliament, where votes are usually counted by show of hand--the one exception being the election of the Speaker, which is generally conducted by secret ballot. A secret ballot vote, however, could relieve pressure on MPs with large Buddhist constituencies to support the bill. (Note: Sri Lankan politics being what it is, it would not be safe to assume that even the results of a secret ballot would not leak out one way or another. End Note.) The Private Member's Bill -------------- ¶4. (SBU) Information available about the Jathika Hela Urumaya's (JHU's) anti-conversion bill is similarly confusing. The JHU presented the draft legislation as a private member's bill for a first reading in Parliament in July 2004. Large numbers of religious and human rights groups challenged the bill in the Supreme Court, which ruled last August that many parts of the bill were unconstitutional. Since then, there have been no further developments with the bill. ¶5. (C) While there is no scheduled date for the government's bill in Parliament, the JHU's bill is apparently on the agenda for May 6, according to the JHU administrative secretary. To date, the JHU has not amended its bill as SIPDIS recommended by the Supreme Court. One option for the party is to present the original bill for a vote, although it would require a two-thirds majority, followed by a national referendum, for passage into law. The alternative is to allow the Speaker of the Parliament to request the Ministry of Justice to make the necessary amendments to the bill. JHU officials told POL FSN on April 19 that the party had not decided on tactics for the May 6 session. ¶6. (C) Before the session, the JHU may introduce its bill in a Parliament Standing Committee to allow a wider debate among MPs and gauge their reactions. In the committee, the JHU could decide to amend its bill as a result of comments from its fellow MPs. An amended bill is treated the same was as a new bill, meaning that if the amended bill is then presented in Parliament on May 6, it will be the bill's "first reading," and no vote will take place. Also like a new bill, this amended bill would be open to a Supreme Court challenge. Government Attitude -------------- ¶7. (C) The Foreign Minister recently emphasized to the Ambassador that the government will not push this bill in Parliament. During a telephone conversation regarding comments made in Washington by Sri Lankan Ambassador Bernard Gunatilleke, the Foreign Minister assured the Ambassador that Gunatilleke was not correctly stating the government's position. Comment -------------- ¶8. (C) Given that the JHU has made "unethical conversions" one of its defining platforms, its attempt to resurrect its draft is to be expected. More surprising is the GSL drafting its own version--especially since most interlocutors believe that popular support for such legislation is limited and we have been assured repeatedly at the highest levels that the GSL is not pushing the bill. Some observers have speculated that the GSL draft may be an attempt to curry favor--for other legislative endeavors like constitutional amendments to abolish the executive presidency--with the seven remaining JHU MPs. Another possibility: President Kumaratunga's Sri Lanka Freedom Party, which draws the bulk of its support from the predominantly rural Sinhalese Buddhist south, may be unwilling to cede to a smaller opposition party any initiative, however unpalatable, that so obviously panders to that vote bank. By drafting its own bill, the GSL can show that it is just as concerned as the JHU about Sinhalese Buddhist interests. But by letting the JHU float its own bill first, the GSL can deflect all the political risk associated with a possible defeat onto another (opposition) party. Should the JHU bill once again meet opposition in Parliament, the GSL will likely ease off pursuit of its own legislation. ¶9. (C) Comment continued: Despite the lack of popular enthusiasm for this legislation, the JHU's success in keeping this issue alive indicates a degree of public receptivity to claims, however unfounded, of "unethical conversion." In our view, a better way to address such tensions is through ecuemenical dialogue at all levels of the community. Along with our many repeated and firm messages to government and political figures discouraging the pursuit of anti-conversion legislation--including Assistant Secretary Rocca's April 20 meeting with Foreign Secretary Palihakkara (septel)--we emphasize the need for better and more regular communication among government, religious, and civil society leaders on this issue. LUNSTEAD