IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

In the matter of an application under Article 121 of the Constitution against a Bill titled Theravada Bhikku Kathikawath (Registration) Act No. 2015

Biyagama Suseela Thero, Sri Bodhi Vihara Pirivena, Bodhiya Road, Udahamulla, Nugegoda

Petitioners

SC (SD) Appl. /2016 Vs The Attorney General, The Attorney Generals Department , Colombo 12.

Respondent

On this 14th day of January, 2016 TO HIS LORDSHIP THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND OTHER HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA I, Biyagama Suseela Thero of Sri Bodhi Vihara Pirivena, Bodhiya Road, Udahamulla, Nugegoda, being a Buddhist, do hereby solemnly and truly declare and affirm as follows;

1. I state that I am the Affirmant above named and the Petitioner hereof.

2. I state that I am a citizen of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and

Bikkhu, and am the Shasanika Secretary of the "Pivithuru Hela Urumaya".

3. I state that this application to Your Lordships' Court arises from a Bill titled Theravada Bhikku Kathikawath (Registration) Act No. 2015.

4. I state that a Bill titled Theravada Bhikku Kathikawath (Registration) Act No. 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the said Bill) was published by way of gazette on or about 14.12.2015 on the orders of the Minister of Buddha Sasana. A copy of the said Bill and its English translation is annexed hereto marked P1 and P2.

5. I state that on 12.01.2016 the said Bill was placed on the Order paper of Parliament.

6. I state that clauses 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 are in violation of Articles 3, 4 (c) and (d), 9, 10, 11, 12 (1), 12 (2), 14(1)(b), 14(1)(c), 14(1)(e), 27 and 28 of the Constitution inasmuch as;

a) The Bill applies only to Bhikkus of the Theravada tradition and thereby

draws a distinction between Bhikkus of the Mahayana tradition and the Theravada tradition,

b) The Bill seeks to restrict the rights and freedoms of Bhikkus of the Theravada tradition in the exercise of their freedom of religion and their freedom of association whilst no such restriction is placed on any Bhikku of the Mahayana tradition or the clergy of the Christian or Catholic communities in Sri Lanka.

c) The Bill further seeks to restrict the rights of Bhikkus who do not belong

to the Shyamopali, Ramagna and Amarapura Maha Nikayas or chapters established under any of the said Nikayas. Accordingly the rights of a Bhikku belonging to a chapter or a Nikaya which is not recognized by or not part of any of the said Maha Nikayas are affected by the provisions of the said Bill.

d) Clause 2 of the said Bill provides for the registration of Kathikawatha of

any of the Maha Nikayas referred to above. Therefore no Kathikawatha of any Nikaya other than a Kathikawatha of any of the Maha Nikayas or a chapter of the said Maha Nikayas can be registered under the proposed Act. No distinction is drawn between Bikkus of different Nikayas or chapters under any law including that of the Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance. Therefore for the 1st time such a distinction is drawn in violation of the Fundamental Rights of the Petitioners enshrined in Articles 12 (1) and 12 (2),

e) Stipulating matters mandatorily need to be included in a kathikawatha is

a violation of the Freedom of Thought and Religion.

f) Appointment of a panel to examine and decide the legality of a kathikawatha is a violation of the Freedom of Religion.

g) Powers vested in the said panel is an exercise of Judicial Power.

h) Compelling a Nikaya or Chapter to conduct an inquiry for every violation

of the provisions of a registered kathikawatha is a violation of the Freedom of Religion.

i) Converting every violation of a decision of the Karaka Sanga Sabava of a chapter or religion to a criminal offence, is a violation of Equality before Law and Freedom of Religion.

j) Empowering the Minister to frame registration with regard to matters hitherto exercised by the Sangha, is a violation of the Freedom of Religion.

7. I have taken steps to deliver a copy of this Petition and documents to the Honourable Speaker.

The contents of this Affidavit are duly read over and explained to the within named Affirmant and he appearing to have understood the contents herein and the consequences thereto, affirmed to and placed his signature at Colombo on this 14th day of January 2016

Before me

Justice of Peace/ Commissioner of Oaths