SUBMISSION ON LGBTIQ PERSONS AND

TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE MECHANISMS

Photo courtesy 30 Years Ago
WOMEN AND MEDIA COLLECTIVE on 08/25/2016
TO THE ZONAL TASK FORCE AND THE CONSULTATION TASK FORCE FOR
RECONCILIATION MECHANISMS

Download glossary of terms here, which was included as part of the submission.
Introduction
We present this submission as individuals self-identifying as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,
Transgender, Intersex, and Queer (LGBTIQ), as family members and friends of LGBTIQ
people, and as individuals/communities coming forward in support of Sri Lankans who wish to
acknowledge and break the silence surrounding a people whose rights have been denied
through the mechanisms and institutional structures of a democratic state.
Context
The war created a climate of insecurity which was attributable in part to decades of
militarisation and the resulting breakdown of democratic norms and the rule of law.
Militarisation creates and boosts very stark models of masculinity and femininity and forces
people into adopting extreme binary gender conforming roles. This is particularly limiting for
people who do not conform to such gender roles. In addition, militarisation paves the way for

these rigid gender norms to be connected to reproductive sexuality (where sexuality is confined
to the logic of reproductionwithin marriage and the monogamous heteronormative family
unit) and its role in the rhetoric of ethno-nationalism. The difficulty in asserting sexual and
gender diversity and expression that differ from the prescribed norms was evident during the
war and continues today. There were instances where people who were assigned female at birth
but identify as male faced a challenging time when they were stopped for routine checks by
military personnel at checkpoints. This occurred when their identity cards were checked and the
gender on the document was found to be recorded as female, which was perceived to be at odds
with their visible gender presentation as male. It should be emphasised that this authentication
and verification of identity (including gender identity) in the context of militarisation, posed
problems for a range of subjects and not only for the people we mention above.
In this way, militarisation led to the reinforcement of heteronormativity and heteropatriarchy,
and forced people to be covert about their sexuality and gender identity. For instance, on 01
August 2016, the media reported that a soldier had been hospitalised as a consequence of
sexual abuse after having spent three days with a Buddhist monk whom he had befriended.
[1]While little is known about this particular case apart from what has been reported in the
media, there are many other media reports and cases referred to those who work with LGBTIQ
people that raise issues around the stifling of discussion, practices and performance of gender
and sexuality.[2]
During the war, groups and organisations working on LGBTIQ rights were afraid to work
openly and visibly in Colombo, and could not even envisage working in areas under military
control. Organisations that continued to work on sexual rights came under scrutiny and
surveillance. The surveillance of NGOs and human rights organisations and activities involved
the requirement of submitting work plans to the government. This created pressure and forced
LGBT groups to work within constraints and to seek creative means to continue working
covertly. This proved detrimental to the sexual health practices and rights of society in general.
Human Rights Defenders and other local and international officials have also been targeted by
the media and publicly humiliated for their work and commitment in areas of sexual health and
human rights.[3] These media references allege that these individuals promote vices and
aggressively promoted their ideology which has slowly started hitting the foundations of Sri
Lankan society especially the family unit. [4]
The destructive nexus between militarisation and heteronormativity could be seen at the highest
levels of government. Political rivals resorted to questioning the masculinity and sexual
normality of their opposition and dissenters, with a view to discrediting them and
delegitimising and diffusing arguments. Power (which also meant the relative power of one
ethnic group over another) was ranked according to crude models of masculinity that were
strong (read conventionally gendered male and heterosexually attracted) or ponna
(derogatory Sinhala for male homosexual, which is also an insulting shorthand for lacking in
masculinity). An archetype was created of a male leader who was both head of the family and
of the nation (the Sinhala king and patriarch) and this model of normative Sinhala

masculinity was invested with a steadying influence, in a story that said that after decades of
war, the country was finally safe and could progress in the hands of a real (Sinhala) man. This
representation assigned virtually supreme power to whatever was designated as normal
masculinity and normal male sexuality (in intersection with meanings of class, ethnicity and
religion) and created a climate of contempt for homosexual men and gender non-conforming
people. Women were seen in a one-dimensional way in terms of their gender and sexuality
denied agency and framed in relation to their connection to (heterosexual and normatively
masculine) men. They were relegated to stereotypical heteronormative and heteropatriarchal
roles as wives and mothers in the private domain, praised for being guardians of the home; for
bringing up healthy, normal families on the patriarchal model; and for ensuring the continuity
of their ethnic groups. In other words, what was prescribed for them was reproductive
sexuality, where they had to adhere to bourgeois and ethno-religiously-framed norms of sexual
respectability. This entailed not recognising that they had sexual agency as heterosexual
women, and not seeing themselves as desiring subjects outside of sexual relations with men
(i.e. one man), marriage and family.
This also paved the way for aggressive moral conservatism, especially with regard to the
normalisation of standards and proper behaviour. Moral conservatism was (and continues to be)
on the rise, especially with regard to normalisation of standards of proper behaviour for women
(for example, prescribing standard dress codes for women working in the public sector and
schools, and for mothers visiting their childrens schools).
Homophobic and transphobic articles repeatedly appear in the media, especially in the print
media, including in some State owned newspapers and those that follow State policy. Radio
and television talk shows often feature homophobic content, including casual homophobic
comments such as jokes. Reporters, editors and radio presenters are rarely (if ever) called out
for their bias in these instances. These references constitute a means by which society
strengthens its resistance to recognising LGBTIQ communities and continues to isolate,
ridicule and justify acts of violence against members of such communities. Complaints to the
Press Complaints Commission have in most cases been unsuccessful and have even created a
backlash.[5]
Rivira, a Sinhala newspaper, published a series of articles in its Sunday editions criticizing the
work conducted by an LGBTIQ organization in Sri Lanka. The articles maligned all LGBTIQ
people and incited violence against the LGBTIQ community. Excerpts of these articles
included quotes such as: ulterior motive of harming the cultural decencies and morality of
Sri Lanka, and compared LGBTIQ persons to mangy dogs who are involved in this dastardly
low and heinous acts [i.e. homosexual sex]. In one of the articles published on 11th September
2011, an LGBTIQ organization was identified by name, and its address was published with
photographs of their field workers. The article also called on parents to take extreme
precautions to protect their sons, based on the misleading and homophobic notion that if a man
is gay, he must necessarily be a paedophile too.[6]
Ensuring Non-Recurrence

The government of 2015, under the leadership of President Maithripala Sirisena, gained victory
at elections on a pledge of good governance. Most importantly, the President, Prime Minister
Ranil Wickremesinghe, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mangala Samaraweera, have
expressed commitment to securing long-term peace and reconciliation premised on principles
of good governance with a focus on strengthening democratic institutions and ending impunity
and inequality. The process of constitutional reform, was strengthened by gaining insight from
the public through consultations. This would hopefully see a full enjoyment of rights in all
structures of transitional justice. These measures could be seen as indicative that Sri Lanka is
enriching its focus on democracy. The time is apt now to put in place structures, policies and
personnel that have a common commitment to ending impunity and observing the Rule of Law.
This would mean hearing, involving and addressing the needs of minorities and victims, which
include LGBTIQ people as well. The State must be open to recognising the fact that prevailing
laws perpetuate the stigmatisation and victimisation of LGBTIQ people, and it must take steps
to make reforms and address these injustices.
In December 2015, vehicles started sporting stickers with Sinhale (Sinhala Blood) written on
them, which depicted the lion and the sword from the Sri Lankan National Flag. The lion
mythology around the lineage of the Sinhala people was used to enforce Sinhala Buddhist
(majoritarian) ideology at a particular political moment. There were incidents of houses and
shops owned by Muslims being spray painted with the same words. Since April 2016, threats
and verbal abuse against LGBTIQ people have been reported from people claiming to stand for
Sinhale ideology; they have also been highly vocal on social media.
The media reported that the Sinhale campaign is supported by at least one opposition
parliamentarian. The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Raad Al Hussein voiced his
concern with regard to Hate Speech spread by continued aggressive campaigns in social media
and other forms (such as the Sinhale bumper sticker campaign) that stoke nationalism against
ethnic, religious and other minorities. In recent months, incidents targeting the Muslim
community, evangelical Christian groups, and LGBT groups have continued to be recorded.
The High Commissioner encourages the Government to be more forthright in combating such
discriminatory violence, including through appropriate legislation to regulate hate speech and
incitement to violence.[7]
On the legal front, one of the most problematic events during war time took place following the
effort, in 1995, to repeal Sri Lankas anti-sodomy law, Section 365A[8] of the Penal Code,
which can be read to criminalise homosexual sexual activity between consenting adults in
private and in public. These efforts resulted in a step backward: instead of the repeal of the law,
the provision was amended so that the category of perpetrator was made gender neutral (where
previously the presumed offence had explicitly applied only to sexual activity between male
persons) and made to apply to women as wellan apparent effort to apply the law equally to
both sexes. Efforts to prevent the application of Section 399 of the Penal Code towards
transgender persons were also ineffective. Struggles to repeal the Vagrants Ordinance which is
used to target women engaged in sex work as well as lower and middle income transwomen
(often on the pretext that they are soliciting) were futile. Section 3(2) of the Vagrants
Ordinance enables a police officer to arrest a person determined to be idle and disorderly
without a warrant, and many transgendered persons are victimised as a result of this law.

Institutions and processes for transitional justice

Enabling Environment
Given that LGBTIQ persons, too, were victims during and after the war years, we ask that any
processes and mechanisms for reconciliation in Sri Lanka should be open and conducive to
receiving submissions and complaints from members of the LGBTIQ community, in a manner
that encourages them to come forward with their narratives of violence, abuse and violations;
that ensures them of full acceptance of their choices; and that provides security in the
eventuality that their submissions are met with contempt.
Human Rights Organizations working with the LGBTIQ community have long documented
that LGBTIQ people belong to communities affected by war, whether combatants or noncombatants, civilians or members of security forces. However, laws and constitutional
provisions exclude them from reporting crimes, abuse and discrimination that they have faced,
as they fear that this would invite further scrutiny on their lives and bring them to the notice of
law enforcement authorities.
During and in the aftermath of the war, perturbing reports have continued to emerge of rape
being used as a means of torture against men and women[9]. As reported by the International
Truth and Justice Project in 2016, Human rights groups in Sri Lanka have focused on sexual
violence as a problem for women. However, two-thirds of our post-war torture victims are
male. Anal rape of male detainees by the Sri Lankan security forces appears prevalent and is an
even less recognised issue than vaginal and anal rape of women [10].
Taking all this into consideration we respectfully call
1.For the continued recognition of the gravity of the crime of rape of women; at the
same time, we also call for the recognition of the existence and seriousness of the crime
of rape of men especially during conflict and war, by including a Penal Code provision
that is separate from the one that addresses the rape of women, to legally define and
recognize the crime of rape of men, along with accompanying punitive provisions. This
would go some way towards empowering men to report the sexual crimes they have
faced and would also strengthen engagement with the Truth Justice Reconciliation and
Non-recurrence Commission.
2.For officials and personnel working within the Transitional Justice frameworks and
mechanisms (not limited to counsellors) to be sensitised through appropriate training to
adopt a non-discriminatory approach and to be accepting of people with diverse gender
expressions and sexual orientations. This will inspire confidence in any truth seeking or
accountability mechanism.
3.For organizations and structures, and especially laws and policies, that are put in place

to serve victims and others who collaborate with the justice system and the Transitional
Justice mechanisms to identify and provide for the possibilities that next-of-kin,
complainants may not be relatives or spouses of the victims, especially in cases or
LGBTIQ people. The laws and the policies especially should not be restrictive. For

instance while it is positive that the Office of Missing Persons Bill[11] provides for
complainants to be any other person, and also for the Office to provide information to
any other complainant, the restrictive definition of the term relative to mean a
spouse or blood relative restricts LGBTIQ partners seeking redress, which is
discriminatory. We would at this point like to recognise the importance of official
recognition for female-headed households in the context of the conflict, at the same time
as we also ask that the provision of reparations and services be not only limited by
identifying households within a rigid structure of traditional definitions of family, and
that they be open to family structures that are not heteronormative.
4.For organisations and individuals working with sexual and gender minorities to have
the freedom to work openly and visibly to support their engagement with Transitional
Justice mechanisms, without fear of social and legal reprisals. This could include
appropriate law enactment and enforcement against hate speech targeted at minority
communities, especially the LGBTIQ community.
5.For the vetting of personnel and officials involved in any arm of the transitional justice
processes, to ensure that offenders accused of sexual and gender based violence are not
part of these processes, and for a whistleblower mechanism to be established that would
take action against such offenders where there are credible complaints of abuse of power
with regard to sexual and gender based violence.
6.For systems of complaint recording to be established, ensuring that there is provision
to address cases of actors who violate these basic standards in receiving testimony or
providing redress and services to any of the Transitional Justice mechanisms.
We ask for recognition of the fact that even giving testimonials of violence and violations of
human rights and asking for justice and reparations are affected by the attitudes of personnel
involved in the process as well as the existence of discriminatory laws and policies pertaining
to the policing of sexuality and gender. This institutionalised discrimination inhibits and
dissuades people from giving evidence for fear of being exposed, shamed, socially stigmatised,
discriminated against and legally victimised. The report of the Public Representations
Committee on Constitutional Reforms[12] stresses the responsibility of the State to accord due
protection to all vulnerable groups including persons with diverse sexual and gender
orientation. In this light, we ask:
7.For explicit Constitutional provisions to protect the rights of people with diverse
sexual orientations and gender identities, through the extension of equality and nondiscrimination provisions on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. This was
suggested in the Report of the Public Representations Committee on Constitutional
Reform as an inclusion to the Bill of Rights with the following clause No person or
group shall be discriminated against on the grounds of race, religion, caste, marital
status, maternity, age, language, mental or physical disability, pregnancy, civil status,
widowhood, social origin, sexual orientation or sexual and gender identities.
8.For the repeal of the following laws that continue to expose LGBTIQ people to abuse
and harm
Section 365 and 365A of the Penal Code

Section 399 of the Penal Code

Vagrants Ordinance
List of Signatories
1.Acushla Wijesinha
2.Ananda Galappatti
3.Anushaya Collure
4.Aritha Wickramasinghe
5.Dr Asha Abeyasekera
6.Ashan Munasinghe
7.Balasingham Skanthakumar
8.Bhavani Fonseka
9.Buddhima Padmasiri
10.Deanne Uyangoda
11.Denver Peterson
12.Dr Darshi Thoradeniya
13.Dini Kurukulasuriya
14.Prof Dushyanthi Mendis
15.Dr Eshani Ruwanpura
16.Gava Bolonghe
17.Gowthaman Balachandran
18.Hans Billimoria
19.Harean Hettiarachchi
20.Dr Harini Amarasuriya
21.Himali Silva
22.Jake Oorloff
23.Dr. Kanchana Ruwanpura
24.Dr Kaushalya Perera
25.Kiruthika Thurairajah
26.Lakshan Dias
27.Mahishi Ranaweera
28.Marcus Kenny
29.Marini Jayawardene
30.Melisha Yapa
31.Mohandhas Thangarajah
32.Neloufer De Mel
33.Niluka Perera
34.Paba Deshapriya
35.Praveena Rajkobal
36.Ramani Muttetuwegama
37.Roshan Dela Bandara
38.Ruki Fernando
39.Ruvanthi Sivapragasam
40.Sachini Perera
41.Sanjana Hattotuwa

42.Sarala Emmanuel
43.Saranga Anjana Wijerathna
44.Sepali Kottegoda
45.Sharika Jayawardene
46.Sharni Jayawardena
47.Sherman De Rose
48.Dr Shermal Wijewardene
49.Dr Shyamani Hettiarachchi
50.Steve De La Zilwa
51.Subha Menike Wijesiriwardene
52.Suhithakumar Maanikkavasagam
53.Sunela Jayewardene
54.Suralini Fernando
55.Thakshala Tissera
56.Thenu Ranketh
57.Thiyagaraja Waradas
58.Thyagi Ruwanpathirana
###
[1] http://www.adaderana.lk/news/36312/monk-arrested-over-sexual-assault-on-soldier
[2] http://www.dailynews.lk/?q=2016%2F08%2F03%2Flocal%2F89415
[3] The Editorial, Daily Mirror, July 29,2010
[4] Ibid
[5] Daily Mirror Editorial A Tide Against The Natural 29 July 2010; Sunday Divaina Women
Disguised as Men 17 May 2009; Sunday Divaina, Pudding Boarding, Sardine Boarding 2
May 2010; Sunday Divaina, Young Men Consuming the Forbidden Fruit 9 May
2010; Divaina, Admitted to Male Ward due to Indistinguishable Clothing 17 August
2010; The Sunday Leader, Karu will save us from Less-Be-Annes, 15 August 1999; The
Sunday Island, Letters to the Editor, Lesbian Conference in Colombo? 20 August 1999;
[6] The Rivira 18th September 2011
( http://www.rivira.lk/2011/09/18/janaindex.htm)/http://www.rivira.lk/2011/09/18/vimarshana.htm/
The Rivira 09th October 2011/http://www.rivira.lk/2011/10/09/vimarshana.htm
The Rivira 30th October 2011/http://www.rivira.lk/2011/10/30/vimarshana.htm
[7] 2016, June, High Commissioner for Human Rights, Oral Update to the Human Rights
Council A/HRC/32/CRP.4
[8] http://esn.ac.lk/gee/images/pdf/Penal-Code-Amendment-Act-No.-22-of-1995.pdf
[9] Report of the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka, A/HRC/30/CRP.2, September 2015, A
[10] 2016, International Truth and Justice Project, Silenced : Survivors of Torture and Sexual
Violence in 2015 http://www.itjpsl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Silenced_jan%202016.pdf
[11] http://documents.gov.lk/files/bill/2016/6/93-2016_E.pdf
[12] http://www.yourconstitution.lk/PRCRpt/PRC_english_report-A4.pdf