ads
Politics
Archuna Ramanathan

Civil Activists File Complaint Against Newly Sworn MP Archuna Ramanathan

zira-fb
zira-twitter
zira-whatsapp
zira-viber
zira-fb
zira-twitter
zira-whatsapp
zira-telegram
zira-viber
A group of civil activists has formally submitted a complaint to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) seeking an investigation into a controversial statement made by newly sworn-in Member of Parliament

 Dr. Archuna Ramanathan. The complaint is in response to remarks posted by the MP on the social media platform, Facebook, regarding his religious beliefs.

Dr. Ramanathan, an independent MP representing the Jaffna District, made headlines on November 21 after sitting in a seat allocated to the Leader of the Opposition during the Parliament session, as MPs were allowed to choose their seats for the day. 

However, the main point of contention stems from his social media statement, in which he declared that the God he believes in is none other than the late Tamil Tiger leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran.

The civil activists argue that the MP's statement is not only controversial but also constitutes a criminal offence, accusing him of promoting a potentially dangerous ideology. They contend that his declaration could incite hatred and division, particularly in the context of Sri Lanka’s history and the ongoing sensitivities surrounding the Tamil Tiger insurgency.

The complaint requests that the CID investigate whether Dr. Ramanathan's statement violates any laws, particularly those related to promoting hate speech or inciting violence. 

The situation has sparked widespread debate on social media and among political analysts, with some defending the MP's right to freedom of expression, while others condemn his statement as inappropriate for a public official.

As of now, Dr. Ramanathan has not publicly responded to the complaint. The CID is yet to confirm whether an investigation will be launched based on the civil activists' request. This development is expected to raise further discussions about political responsibility and the limits of free speech in Sri Lanka’s complex political landscape.

0%
0%
0%
0%
Comments