Topic
Justice & Human Rights
2,079 speeches · 258 speakers
Party share
By the speaker's party · counts only, no scoring. "Unattributed" = speeches not resolved to an MP.
Most active on this topic
| # | Member | Speeches |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hon. Harshana Nanayakkara, Attorney at Law, M.P. JJB | 162 |
| 2 | Hon. Sajith Premadasa, M.P. SJB | 96 |
| 3 | Hon. (Dr.) Ramanathan Archchuna, M.P. Independent Group 17 - Jaffna | 84 |
| 4 | Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney at Law, M.P. SJB | 79 |
| 5 | Hon. Ajith P. Perera, M.P. SJB | 71 |
| 6 | Hon. Ananda Wijepala, M.P. JJB | 67 |
| 7 | Hon. Mujibur Rahman, M.P. SJB | 60 |
| 8 | Hon. Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, M.P. JJB | 52 |
| 9 | Hon. Shanakiyan Rajaputhiran Rasamanickam, M.P. ITAK | 48 |
| 10 | Hon. (Dr.) Nalinda Jayatissa, M.P. JJB | 47 |
Speeches
2,079 on this topic- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Mano Ganesan SJB AI summary Mano Ganesan questioned the Minister of Justice and National Integration on measures to reduce severe prison overcrowding, citing the Minister’s statement that prisons are overcrowded by about 300 percent. He asked whether the 2024 amendment allowing remand time to count toward sentences would be applied to earlier prisoners, what action is being taken to address delays caused by pending forensic reports, whether general amnesties for minor offences will be restored, and whether non-serious offenders over 70 can be released on good conduct. Adjournment Debate: Stock Exchange Activity and Ministerial Response Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Shanakiyan Rajaputhiran Rasamanickam ITAK AI summary Hon. Shanakiyan Rajaputhiran Rasamanickam criticized the Government’s handling of education reforms and university governance, comparing it to the previous Government’s failed agriculture policies. He alleged discriminatory changes to the ethnic composition of the Eastern University Council, cited a court judgment finding the premature replacement of Council members improper, and tabled the order. He also argued that national history, including minority-related political agreements and loss of citizenship rights for estate Tamils, is inadequately taught, and said ITAK would consider its position on any future No-Confidence Motion. Debate: Universities (Amendment) Bill - Second and Third Reading Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. G.G. Ponnambalam ACTC AI summary Hon. G.G. Ponnambalam said his party sought to offer constructive criticism, and urged the Prime Minister to reverse the previous Government’s ban on law practitioners serving as university lecturers, citing its impact on Dr. Kumaravadivel Guruparan. He also called for greater transparency and fairness in Vice-Chancellor selection processes and appointments to University Councils. He strongly opposed the Cabinet-approved Kivul Oya Project, alleging it continued Sinhala settlement in Tamil areas after wartime displacement and citing environmental feasibility concerns and constitutional issues. He demanded the Prime Minister’s intervention, warning that proceeding with the project would undermine Tamil confidence in the Government’s commitment to systemic change in the North and East. Debate: Universities (Amendment) Bill - Second and Third Reading Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney-at-Law SJB AI summary Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara raised concerns about RM Parks (Private) Limited, including the storage of 23,000 metric tons in allegedly unsuitable locations and the treatment of a female officer who investigated the matter, stating that her duties had been suspended and she had been reassigned to a garage. He also disputed Minister Kumar Jayakody’s statement that he had not met anyone in Russia, claiming the Minister met SUEK company officials at 1.00 p.m. and tabling related information for parliamentary attention. Debate: Universities (Amendment) Bill - Second and Third Reading Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney-at-Law SJB AI summary Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara criticised the Government’s proposed university amendments, arguing that they would politicize appointments of deans and department heads and worsen declining university rankings. He called instead for a comprehensive reform of the Universities Act, including globally comparable posts such as Deputy Vice-Chancellors for research, academic affairs and international affairs. He also raised concerns about judicial independence, questioning the appointment of a High Court Judge as Additional Secretary to the Ministry of Justice while hearing politically sensitive cases, and urged action to protect judicial processes from politicization. Debate: Universities (Amendment) Bill - Second and Third Reading Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sivagnanam Shritharan ITAK AI summary Hon. Sivagnanam Shritharan rejected allegations made by Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara and others that he misused land, received funds from the Poonakari solar power project, or held improper assets, and demanded that any such claims be substantiated with bank and transaction details. He questioned why complaints lodged with the FCID and the Bribery Commission had not been concluded, and called for transparent investigations involving relevant officials. He also linked the allegations to broader political pressures and raised concerns over land dispossession, militarisation, unreleased lands, and attacks on Tamil representatives, urging that justice be upheld through proper inquiry. Debate: Universities (Amendment) Bill - Second and Third Reading Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sivagnanam Shritharan ITAK AI summary Hon. Sivagnanam Shritharan raised a Standing Order 27(2) question to the President and relevant Ministers regarding gold jewellery pawned by Tamil people at the LTTE-run Tamil Eelam Bank during the war, which owners were unable to recover amid displacement and the final stages of the conflict. He cited wartime economic restrictions, continuing hardship and malnutrition in the North and East, and asked for data on the quantity of jewellery and number of affected persons. He requested details on any government programme or timeline for restitution, noting that the return of these items had been presented as an election pledge in 2024. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Harshana Nanayakkara, Attorney-at-Law JJB AI summary Hon. Harshana Nanayakkara stated that the Government, including the President and its Members, is committed to protecting the independence of the Attorney General’s Department and all institutions while upholding the rule of law. Responding to concerns raised by the Leader of the Opposition and commentary on social media, he said he is accountable to the President for his ministerial responsibilities and would not act on unverified allegations, but assured that action would be taken against offences regardless of position or status. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sajith Premadasa - Leader of the Opposition SJB AI summary Hon. Sajith Premadasa proposed that all 225 Members of Parliament stand in support of the independence of the Attorney General. The remark framed the issue as a matter of institutional independence requiring collective parliamentary affirmation. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sajith Premadasa - Leader of the Opposition SJB AI summary Sajith Premadasa condemned personal insults alleging misconduct, saying that if such claims are false they should be clearly denied. He stressed that the Attorney General’s independence, freedom, and impartial decision-making are essential to the democratic framework, and thanked the Minister of Justice for defending that principle. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sajith Premadasa - Leader of the Opposition SJB AI summary Sajith Premadasa objected to remarks implying a personal association between the Attorney General and the Minister of Justice in the context of discussing the Attorney General’s independence and decision-making. He sought an opportunity to respond and challenged the propriety of such a characterization during the debate. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sajith Premadasa - Leader of the Opposition SJB AI summary Sajith Premadasa thanked the Minister for his answer and acknowledged his stated support for the independence of the Attorney General’s decision-making. He said the Minister had been attacked online over that stance, including allegations of protecting an associate, and urged him to examine the political affiliations of the websites involved. He emphasized the importance of the rule of law and basic legal principles such as hearing both sides and avoiding conflicts of interest, arguing that these underpin Sri Lanka’s legal and democratic institutions. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Harshana Nanayakkara, Attorney‑at‑Law - Minister of Justice and National Integration JJB AI summary The Minister replied to questions under Standing Order 27(2) on the appointment and independence of the Attorney-General, stating that the President appoints the Attorney-General only with Constitutional Council approval under Articles 41A(1) and 61E, a mechanism restored by the 21st Amendment. He said the Government acts within existing constitutional and statutory safeguards, including the removal procedures in Act No. 5 of 2002, to prevent arbitrary removal and ensure due process. He added that criticisms of the Attorney-General and other public bodies are recognized as expressions of opinion, but the Government would take lawful measures if such opinions affect the Attorney-General’s independence. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sajith Premadasa - Leader of the Opposition SJB AI summary Sajith Premadasa, by a Question by Private Notice, asked the Government to clarify whether the Attorney-General’s office is constitutionally independent, including the role of the Constitutional Council under Article 41A in approving appointments. He sought assurances that the Attorney-General can perform prosecutorial, advisory and legislative-assistance functions free from political interference, and asked what safeguards exist under the Removal of Officers (Procedure) Act, No. 5 of 2002, against baseless allegations targeting the Attorney-General and the IGP. He further asked whether the Government recognizes an organized campaign against the Attorney-General’s official functions and what measures it will take to stop such campaigns and protect the office’s independence. Standing Order 27(2) Questions: Attorney-General Independence, Gold Jewellery Return Read →
- 23 January 2026 The Hon. Sajith Premadasa - Leader of the Opposition SJB AI summary The Leader of the Opposition raised a point of order under Standing Order 146 regarding a Staff Advisory Committee meeting on an alleged incident of sexual misconduct in Parliament. He stated that Members had only received a note on the Inquiry Officer’s report and its conclusion, and requested that the full report be provided before the Committee discussion. Procedural Matters and Points of Order Read →
- 22 January 2026 The Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney-at-Law SJB AI summary Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara said the Opposition had cooperated on education reforms but questioned the legitimacy of the 2024–2025 proposals, claiming earlier 2020–2024 reform documents lacked the Prime Minister’s signature. He alleged Rs. 483 million had been wasted at the National Institute of Education and called for an examination of those involved. He also criticized the President’s remarks in Jaffna in relation to Buddhism and northern issues, and demanded that Hon. Sritharan resign from the Constitutional Council, alleging he had supported Government appointments while representing small Opposition parties and faced conflict-of-interest and corruption-related allegations. Adjournment Debate: Comprehensive Educational Transformation Process Read →
- 22 January 2026 Hon. (Dr.) Nalinda Jayatissa JJB AI summary Hon. (Dr.) Nalinda Jayatissa stated that the health service’s aim is to prevent loss of life and that any shortcomings in the relevant process would be addressed through disciplinary and legal action. He said the matter is before court and assured that the hospital, Health Ministry, and Provincial Director of Health Services would assist the judiciary and provide the necessary documents. Ministerial Statement: Death of Kuganeshan Dinoja from Silawatta, Mullaitivu Read →
- 22 January 2026 Hon. (Dr.) Ramanathan Archchuna Independent Group 17 - Jaffna AI summary Hon. (Dr.) Ramanathan Archchuna questioned the Health Minister regarding the death of a child, noting the admission time, recorded administration of four vials of adrenaline, and a pending inquiry scheduled for 29 January. He raised concern that the post-mortem report stated the cause of death was “under investigation” after the body had been released and buried, argued this was improper, and requested appropriate action while indicating the matter would be taken to court. Ministerial Statement: Death of Kuganeshan Dinoja from Silawatta, Mullaitivu Read →
- 22 January 2026 Hon. (Dr.) Nalinda Jayatissa — Minister of Health and Mass Media and Chief Government Whip AI summary The Minister responded to a Standing Order 27(2) question regarding a child’s admission and treatment at a District General Hospital on 21 December 2025. He stated that the child was taken directly to the ETU within five minutes, examined by relevant medical officers including paediatric staff, and treated for suspected food allergy, though communication with the parents about medication was not documented. He said an inquiry by the Northern Province Provincial Department of Health Services is ongoing, action has been taken on interim recommendations, and post-mortem samples have been sent to the Government Analyst before further details can be provided. Ministerial Statement: Death of Kuganeshan Dinoja from Silawatta, Mullaitivu Read →
- 22 January 2026 Hon. Ravi Karunanayake NDF AI summary Hon. Ravi Karunanayake raised an urgent question under Standing Order 27(2) regarding a Deputy Minister’s statement on converting EPF lump-sum gratuity into a monthly pension, noting unrest among workers and unions and recalling the 2011 controversy and Roshen Chanaka’s death. He questioned whether IMF conditions, actuarial studies, Cabinet discussions, or comparative analyses support the proposal, and asked that relevant material be presented to Parliament. He sought assurances on safeguards for the Rs. 6.2 trillion EPF/ETF asset base, continued pre-retirement withdrawal facilities, prevention of political or debt-financing use of funds, and a transparent consultation process with trade unions before any gazette is issued. Question by Private Notice: Employees' Provident Fund Gratuity to Pension Scheme (Standing Order 27(2)) Read →