NPP MP says govt. oblivious to public plight and sentiments

By Saman Indrajith

JVP-led NPP MP Dr Harini Amrasuriya told Parliament yesterday that the statements by government ministers and politicians were ample testimony to the fact that they did not understand the plight and sentiments of the general public.

Participating in the second reading debate on the Bureau of Rehabilitation Bill, Dr Amarasuriya said: “People have no trust in this government. People look at everything that the government does with suspicion. The government does nothing for the benefit of the people but only makes false statements. Today the MPs spoke before me and asked the opposition to trust them in their endeavours to save the country from the present crisis. But we have enough examples of their double-talk. The Bills and motions put forward by the government are not with good intentions.

For example, the Justice Minister presented a piece of legislation titled Bureau of Rehabilitation Bill and stated that it is a law to provide for the rehabilitation of drug addicts. As we know the original Bill was ruled by the Supreme Court a draft inconsistent with the Constitution. The Supreme Court determined that the bill in its entirety was inconsistent with the Constitution. I am not sure that the apex court has given a similar opinion on any bill presented to this Parliament in its history. The Supreme Court usually instructs repealing or amending certain sections of a bill which are unconstitutional. But in this case the court stated that the bill as a whole is inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and as such may be enacted only by the special majority required by Article 84(2) of the Constitution. The draft bill was said to have amended accordingly, but it still contains certain sections that could be abused to detain in the name of rehabilitation of persons other than drug addicts.

There is a clause stating that the objective of the Bureau shall be to rehabilitate drug dependent persons or any other person as may be identified by law as a person who requires rehabilitation and which may include treatment and adoption of various therapies in order to ensure effective reintegration and reconciliation, through developing socio-economic standards. Now, who are referred to as ‘any other person identified by law as a person who requires rehabilitation?’ Under what law this recognition is made? Which is the authority to make this recognition? These questions are not clarified by the text of the Bill. This can lead to arbitrary action since the officials themselves will not know the extent of their powers.

Isn’t it reasonable for people and opposition not to trust this government when it attempts to bring about laws to restrict human rights of people? They bring in laws in the name of rehabilitating drug addicts. But the content of the law provides for the abuses by officials to detain persons other than drug addicts,” Dr Amarasuriya said.