PSTA worse than PTA: FSP

The Frontline Socialist Party (FSP) has criticized the government for potentially using the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA) to stifle political activism, arguing that certain provisions in the Act are more restrictive than those of the existing Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). Education Secretary Pubudu Jayagoda pointed out that the definition of terrorism in the PSTA is excessively broad, potentially classifying a wide range of political activities as terrorism.

He argued that the bill's approach to defining terrorism is based on compelling the government or an international organization to act or refrain from acting, rather than on internationally recognized criteria such as killings, serious bodily harm, kidnapping, or acts intended to instill terror. Jayagoda also alleged that the PSTA transfers significant powers from the judiciary to the executive branch and extends arrest, investigation, and detention powers to armed forces and the police.

The FSP questioned why the government is moving forward with the bill despite previously seeking public input on an earlier draft, pointing out that the current draft was essentially the same as the previous version, with minor rearrangements. Jayagoda also raised concerns about the Committee appointed to draft the legislation, alleging that changes were made without the Committee's knowledge.

He noted that the Attorney-at-Law Saliya Peiris, a member of the Committee, had reportedly stated that the draft had been altered. Jayagoda emphasized that the PSTA is fundamentally similar to a previous bill introduced by the previous government in 2023, which was opposed by the National People’s Power (NPP) and challenged in court.

He urged NPP MPs to oppose the PSTA and called for a broad public movement against the legislation, challenging the government to engage in an open debate about it.