Amnesty International calls for withdrawal of government’s Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill

Daily Mirror, Lanka Business Online, Sri Lanka Mirror and Hiru News report that Human Rights Watch (HRW) warned Sri Lanka’s Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill, sent to parliament on October 20, 2026, could expose people to detention without proper safeguards, torture and other rights violations. The reports describe HRW’s warning about the proposed law, not a specific instance of abuse.

Lanka Business Online reports that the bill is framed as a measure to tackle organised crime and assist cooperation between law-enforcement agencies internationally, and as a way to implement the 2003 UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime. HRW says, according to the outlet, that the text is imprecise and weakens procedural protections available under ordinary criminal law, creating broad powers in parallel legal structures.

Lanka Business Online reports that HRW considers the organised-crime proposal together with the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill, which it says was submitted on October 6, 2026. HRW argues, according to the outlet, that both bills carry over harmful elements of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. The outlet says President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s National People’s Power alliance promised in its 2024 election manifesto to end laws it viewed as oppressive, protect civil rights across the country and repeal the PTA.

Newswire reports that the UN Human Rights Office examined the terrorism bill in a 19-page assessment dated October 13; the bill had been gazetted on September 22, 2026. The office recognised changes from earlier versions but warned that the proposal still raises risks of arbitrary detention, limits on expression, torture and other rights violations. It called for a thorough review before enactment and consultation with civil society, independent bodies and legal specialists.

Newswire reports that the UN’s concerns include authority for the Defence Ministry Secretary to approve detention periods of up to two months, renewable to a maximum of one year. The outlet says court approval would be needed for extensions beyond the initial period, but the first decision would remain with the executive. The assessment also warned that broadly worded terrorism offences could be applied to journalists, human rights defenders, civil society groups and people taking part in peaceful protests, and raised particular concerns about clauses on confidential material and publications.

Written automatically by AI from the outlets’ own reports, and not reviewed by an editor. It can be wrong — the original report is the authority.