States of Emergency - Centre for Policy Alternatives

3.2.3
 The
 Concept
 of
 Militant
 Democracy
 and
 the
 Sixth
Amendment
In the wake of the events of ‘Black July’ 1983, in addition to the
orthodox emergency‐related measures the government took, was
the enactment of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. The
aim of the amendment was to prohibit and punish the activities of
persons, political parties and organisations whose activities
threatened the independence, sovereignty, unity and the
territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. 171 Accordingly, the amendment
provided, inter
alia, that ‘No person shall, directly or indirectly, on
or outside Sri Lanka, support, espouse, promote, Linance,
encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate State
within the territory of Sri Lanka’. 172 The amendment goes on to
provide for penalties in detail, including that where the Supreme
Court on an application declares that a person has contravened
the said prohibition, or that a body corporate has as one of its
objectives the establishment of a separate state, civic disabilities
are imposed or the organisation proscribed ipso
 jure (in addition
to a host of other penalties such as the forfeiture of property and
elected ofLice). Apart from what was perceived to be an act of
gross insensitivity and arrogance with respect to its timing, upon
the heels of the severe trauma of ethnic violence against Tamils,
this ban on even the peaceful advocacy of secession has been
intensely criticised by liberal commentators in Sri Lanka, both on
principled grounds such as free speech and on more strategic
considerations of conLlict resolution.
We are not concerned here with the broader constitutional and
political implications of this amendment in respect of the ethnic
171
Preamble
172
Article 157A (1)
101