Source: http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/country-search-post.cfm?country=Sri+Lanka
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 05:01:39+00:00

Document:
BBC, Country Profiles: Sri Lanka, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-11999611, Oct. 29, 2018.
 Amnesty Intl., Death Penalty: Countries Abolitionist in Practice, http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/countries-abolitionist-in-practice, accessed Nov. 29, 2010.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, art. 285, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006.
 Darshana Sanjeewa, 1, 299 on death-row in SL prisons, Daily Mirror, http://www.dailymirror.lk/article/-on-death-row-in-SL-prisons-160894.html, Jan. 10, 2019.
 Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2009, PINCITE, ACT 50/001/2010, Mar. 30, 2010.
At least one expert does not enumerate Sri Lanka among those countries applying the mandatory death penalty.  However, in our survey of jurisprudence we could not find a single case where the offense of murder was not punished with death.  In any case where a killing was not punished with death, the charge of murder had been reduced to culpable homicide for statutory mitigating factors such as intoxication,  provocation  or lack of common murderous intent.  This sort of discretion only lessens culpability, and does not operate as mitigation of sentence..
The Penal Code provides: “Sentence of death shall not be pronounced on or recorded against any person who, in the opinion of the court, is under the age of eighteen years; but, in lieu of that punishment, the court shall sentence such person to be detained during the President’s pleasure.”  Sri Lanka is a party to the ICCPR  and Convention on the Rights of the Child,  which prohibit such executions.
The Code of Criminal Procedure contains some language that could protect intellectually disabled persons who are less able to avail themselves of the safeguard of a fair trial. “If the accused though not insane cannot be made to understand the proceedings the Magistrate's Court or the High Court as the case may be, may proceed with the inquiry or trial, and if such inquiry results in a commitment or if such trial results in a conviction the proceedings shall be forwarded to the Court of Appeal with a report of the circumstances of the case and the Court of Appeal shall pass thereon such order as it thinks fit.”  We do not know how this language is, in practice, interpreted and applied.
 Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 294-296, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 293-297, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006. Culpable homicide is an act that would qualify as murder except for some excuse such as provocation. Note that we have cited additional definitional sections beyond those referenced in the Firearms Ordinance.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996. Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 363-364, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 379-385, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006. Robbery is attempted or successful theft or extortion by menace. Note that we have cited additional definitional sections beyond those referenced in the Firearms Ordinance.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 350-360(A), amended by Act No. 16 of 2006. Note that we have cited additional definitional sections beyond those referenced in the Firearms Ordinance.
 Sri Lanka Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act, secs. 5, 14, No. 13 of 1984.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 114-127, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006. Note that the Articles denoted by the Firearms Ordinance are 114-123, but there may be a misprint in the Schedule to the Ordinance.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 128-137, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006. Note that the Articles denoted by the Firearms Ordinance are 123-133, but Articles 123-127 are treasonable offenses, so this must be a misprint in the Schedule to the Ordinance. We simply noted all of offenses relating to military personnel, the application of the Ordinance may be more limited.
 Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, art. 129, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Air Force Act of 1949, arts. 95, 97, 98, 131(1-2), amended by Act No. 9 of 1993; Sri Lanka Army Act of 1949, arts. 95, 97, 98, 131(1-2),amended by Act No. 10 of 1993.
 Sri Lanka Navy Act of 1950, arts. 54, 55, 92, amended by Act No. 53 of 1993.
 Sri Lanka Navy Act of 1950, arts. 57, 58, amended by Act No. 53 of 1993.
 Sri Lanka Navy Act of 1950, arts. 60, 63-65, 71, 83, amended by Act No. 53 of 1993.
 Sri Lanka Navy Act of 1950, art. 118(1-2), amended by Act No. 53 of 1993.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 315-324, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 294, 300-301, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006. Culpable homicide is an act that would qualify as murder except for some excuse such as provocation. Note that we have cited additional definitional sections beyond those referenced in the Firearms Ordinance.
 Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance, art. 44(A) & Schedule C, amended by Act No. 22 of 1996; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, arts. 350-360(A), amended by Act No. 16 of 2006. Primarily, these Articles might affect the stage of trafficking at which the victim is actually seized, although under Schedule C other individuals might be affected as abettors. Schedule C refers to some articles of the Penal Code that are not printed in the version amended by 2006.
Note that we have cited additional definitional sections beyond those referenced in the Firearms Ordinance.
 Sri Lanka Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1979, amended by Act No. 22 of 1988. For death eligible offenses, see the Sri Lanka Penal Code or Schedule III of the Sri Lanka Firearms Ordinance.
 For example, see Sri Lanka Navy Act, art. 118(1-2), amended by Act No. 53 of 1993; Sri Lanka Air Force Act of 1949, art. 131(1-2), amended by Act No. 9 of 1993; Sri Lanka Army Act of 1949, art. 131(1-2),amended by Act No. 10 of 1993. Note that the Army and Air Force acts use “shall be liable to” instead of “shall be punished with,” and this difference could be significant. King v. Banda, Court of Criminal Appeal of Sri Lanka, Nov. 19, 1942.
 Weerawardane v. State , Appeal No. 52 of 1998, Court of Appeal, Oct. 21, 1999.
 Roger Hood & Carolyn Hoyle, The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 4th ed., p. 279, Oxford University Press, 2008.
 Sri Lanka’s cases are searchable online through the World Legal Information Institute at http://www.worldlii.org/lk/, last accessed Feb. 10, 2011.
 Jayathilake v. Attorney General, Appeal No. 8 of 2000, Court of Appeal, Jan. 1, 2003.
 Chuti v. Attorney General, Appeal No. 41 of 1991, Court of Appeal, Oct. 23, 2002.
 Raju v. Attorney General, Appeals Nos. 89-91 of 1998, Court of Appeal, Dec. 11, 2002.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, arts. 280, 286, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006.
 Constitution of the Republic of Sri Lanka of 1978, art. 34, as amended through 2000.
 Wije Dias, Sri Lankan President Moves to Reinstate Death Penalty, World Socialist Web Site, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/nov2004/sri-n26.shtml, Nov. 26, 2004. Article 34 of the Constitution does not describe the process the author insists is followed, and we found no proof that anyone but the President has ultimate authority. The fact that the sentencing judge, Attorney General and Minister of Justice are involved in an advisory process does not mean that a dissenting viewpoint can stop the President’s approval of an execution.
 See, for example, BBC News, Sri Lanka Revives the Death Penalty, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/296124.stm, Mar. 13, 1999. The decision whether to commute a death sentence that is entirely controlled by the President—as is typical in systems that describe the process we outlined in the text above. Our evaluation would change if the facts were shown to be different.
 Sri Lanka Air Force Act of 1949, art. 131(1-2), amended by Act No. 9 of 1993; Sri Lanka Army Act of 1949, art. 131(1-2),amended by Act No. 10 of 1993; Sri Lanka Navy Act, art. 118(1-2), amended by Act No. 53 of 1993. In general, “liable to” is interpreted as “exposed to,” although a court could interpret “liable to” as restricting discretion within a range of options, if the range is part of a gradation of punishments based on severity. King v. Banda, Court of Criminal Appeal of Sri Lanka, Nov. 19, 1942; Thiruchelvam v. Attorney General, Appeal No. 144 of 1994, Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, Mar. 6, 1995.
 Status, Declarations, and Reservations, ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Dec. 8, 2010.
 Status, Declarations, and Reservations, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1577 U.N.T.S. 3, Nov. 20, 1989, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Feb. 11, 2011.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, art. 262, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, art. 77, 78, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, art. 338, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, arts. 373-378, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006.
 Status, Declarations, and Reservations, Optional Prot. to the ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-5&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Dec. 8, 2010.
 Status, Declarations, and Reservations, Second Optional Prot. to the ICCPR, Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty, 1642 U.N.T.S. 414, Dec. 15, 1989, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-12&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Dec. 8, 2010.
 U.N.G.A., 63rd session, Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms,U.N. Doc. A/63/430/Add.2, Dec. 4, 2008.
U.N. Doc. A/62/439/Add.2, Dec. 5, 2007.
One source claims that the reason for the longstanding moratorium is that the agreement of the trial judge, Attorney General, Minister of Justice and the President is needed before a death warrant is issued, and if there is no agreement, the sentence is automatically commuted.  Contrary to the source’s reading, Article 34 of the Constitution requires only an advisory process in which the President makes the ultimate determination, there is no provision for automatic commutation, and there are 400 or more individuals on death row. In practical terms, the President may be influenced by the opinions of his advisors—and as the previous discussion shows, may rely on their determinations. Given the varied Presidential and administrative stances on the issue of executions over the past ten years, and the consistency of abolitionist de facto policy, it is more reasonable to conclude that reinstituting executions would be a radical departure from a longstanding policy that is favored by a number of the population, and as such the semi-official moratorium may continue until outright abolition.
 The Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, art. 12(4), Sep. 7, 1978.
 The Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, art. 23(13), Sep. 7, 1978.
 The Hindu, Sri Lanka Mulls Reintroducing Death Penalty, http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200907261521.htm, Jul. 26, 2009. Note that this source incorrectly states that the last execution, that of Maru Sira, was in 2003. Maru Sira was asphyxiated in a controversial execution in 1975, and was not executed in 2003.
 Lanka Journal, Death Penalty Under Review-Sri Lanka Prisons Commissioner, http://www.lankajournal.com/2009/08/death-penalty-under-review-sri-lanka-prisons-commissioner/, Aug. 30, 2009.
 U.N.G.A., 63rd Session, 70th Plenary Meeting, pp. 16- 17, U.N. Doc. A/63/PV.70, Dec. 18, 2008; Asian Tribune, Sri Lanka Urges Sudan to Consider Ratifying Convention Against Torture and Moratorium on the Execution of the Death Penalty, http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2010/09/21/sri-lanka-urges-sudan-to-consider-ratifying-convention-against-torture-and-moratorium-e, Sep. 21, 2010. Note that Sri Lanka’s opposition to Sudan’s application of the death penalty does not necessarily derive from any commitment not to carry it out in Sri Lanka, but Sri Lanka’s vote for a global moratorium on executions is significant.
 See, for example, BBC News, Sri Lanka Revives the Death Penalty, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/296124.stm, Mar. 13, 1999; Lanka Journal, Death Penalty Under Review-Sri Lanka Prisons Commissioner, http://www.lankajournal.com/2009/08/death-penalty-under-review-sri-lanka-prisons-commissioner/, Aug. 30, 2009. The latter article suggests that the Minister of Justice could control whether an individual is executed, but neither the former article nor the law comport with that. Constitution of the Republic of Sri Lanka of 1978, art. 34, as amended through 2000.
 Wije Dias, Sri Lankan President Moves to Reinstate Death Penalty, World Socialist Web Site, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/nov2004/sri-n26.shtml, Nov. 26, 2004.
 ColumboPage, Sri Lankans Want Death Penalty Reinstated, http://www.colombopage.com/archive_11/Feb24_1298558630KA.php, Feb. 24, 2011.
 King v. Banda, Court of Criminal Appeal of Sri Lanka, Nov. 19, 1942.
 Banda v. Attorney General, Appeal No. 83 of 1993, Court of Appeal, Sep. 12, 1997 (discussing King v. Banda); Ekanayake v. Attorney General, Appeal No. 132 of 1984, Court of Appeal, Aug. 7, 1986 (affirmed by Ekanayake v. Attorney General, Appeal No. 68 of 1986, Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, Jan. 14, 1988. It should be noted that in this latter case, the Court was considering Ekanayake’s sentence delivered under an ex post facto law. For discussion, see David Averbuck, The Sepala Ekanayake Case—Domestic Sri Lankan Law Incorporates International Law, Sri Lanka J. of Intl. Law. Vol. 1, p. 1, 1989. According to the article, the Supreme Court relied on customary international law to uphold the conviction. A reading of the case leaves one wondering whether the Court genuinely considered any issue before it, or simply accepted an ultimately light sentence (2 years) for a person convicted under an ex-post facto law for a highly publicized, deranged act.
 Thiruchelvam v. Attorney General, Appeal No. 144 of 1994, Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, Mar. 6, 1995.
 Sri Lanka Air Force Act of 1949, art. 131(1-2), amended by Act No. 9 of 1993; Sri Lanka Army Act of 1949, art. 131(1-2),amended by Act No. 10 of 1993. An additional wrinkle is that the Navy Act provides the mandatory death penalty for the same offenses. Sri Lanka Navy Act, art. 118(1-2), amended by Act No. 53 of 1993.
 Aquinas V. Tambimuttu, Sri Lanka: Legal Research and Legal System, GlobaLex, http://www.nyulawglobal.org/Globalex/Sri_Lanka.htm, Jan. 2009.
 Sri Lanka Criminal Procedure Code of 1979, art. 161, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006; Sri Lanka Judicature Act of 1978, art. 11 & Second Schedule, amended by Act No. 27 of 1999; Sri Lanka Penal Code, arts. 296, 297, 364, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, art. 450, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006; Sri Lanka Penal Code of 1885, art. 114, amended by Act No. 16 of 2006.
 U.S. Dept. of State, 2009 Human Rights Report: Sri Lanka, Denial of Fair Public Trial, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/sca/136093.htm, Mar. 11, 2010.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, arts. 13-14, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006.
 Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, arts. 331, 334, amended by Act No. 7 of 2007; Sri Lanka Judicature Act of 1978, arts. 14-16, amended by Act No. 27 of 1999.
Individuals in Sri Lanka are legally guaranteed the right to counsel.  The U.S. Department of State reports that indigent individuals facing serious charges are provided with counsel, but does not describe the nature or quality of the counsel received.  In 2003, a journal article published in the Sri Lanka Journal of International Law suggested that the legal aid available to indigent defendants (including those facing capital charges) was delivered by inexperienced and sometimes incompetent counsel.  We do not know whether the situation has changed since 2003.
Individuals in Sri Lanka are legally guaranteed the right to counsel.  The U.S. Department of State reports that indigent individuals facing serious charges are provided with counsel on appeal, but does not describe the nature or quality of the counsel received.  In 2003, a journal article published in the Sri Lanka Journal of International Law confirmed that counsel is available on appeal, but suggested that the legal aid available to indigent defendants (including those facing capital charges) was delivered by inexperienced and sometimes incompetent counsel.  We do not know whether the situation has changed since 2003.
 Newsfirst.lk, Both Gallows in Working Order-Suhada Gamlath, http://www.newsfirst.lk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4471&Itemid=176, Aug. 29, 2009; The Island Online, Edither G. Perera, Superintendant of Prisons, Ret., Capital Punishment-Gallows, http://www.island.lk/2009/09/19/satmag7.html, last accessed Mar. 8, 2011; H.G. Dharmadasa, I Watched Them Being Hanged, http://sundaytimes.lk/010107/plus5.html, Jan. 7, 2001.
 ‘Lectric Law Library, Criminal Justice System of Sri Lanka, http://www.lectlaw.com/files/int20.htm, last accessed Mar. 8, 2011.
 Park Mihye, Intern, Human Rights Office, Sri Lanka’s Prison Conditions, Ethics In Action, Vol. 2, No. 4, http://www.ethicsinaction.asia/archive/2008-ethics-in-action/vol.-2-no.-4-august-2008/sri-lanka2019s-prison-conditions, Aug. 2008.
 U.S. Dept. of State, 2008 Human Rights Report: Sri Lanka, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/sca/119140.htm, Feb. 25, 2009.
 Mark Warren, Foreigners Under Sentence of Death Worldwide, http://users.xplornet.com/~mwarren/world.html, last updated May 7, 2010.
 Constitution of the Republic of Sri Lanka, art. 13(3), amended through 2000; Sri Lanka Code of Criminal Procedure of 1979, arts. 195(g), 260, 272, amended by Act No. 7 of 2006; Sri Lanka Judicature Act of 1978, art. 41, amended by Act No. 27 of 1999; Legal Aid Act No. 27 of 1978. For interpretation of Article 195(g) of the 1979 Act, as well as discussion of the procedural protections in utilizing attorneys and the extension of free legal aid to indigents, see Noel Dias, Legal Assistance and Aid: International Standards Applicable in Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka J. of Intl. Law, Vol. 15, p. 77, 2003.
 U.S. Dept. of State, 2008 Human Rights Report: Sri Lanka, Denial of Fair Public Trial, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/sca/119140.htm, Mar. 8, 2009.
 See Sri Lanka’s homepage with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/AsiaRegion/Pages/LKIndex.aspx.
 Search Sri Lanka’s homepage at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/AsiaRegion/Pages/LKIndex.aspx, last accessed Feb. 26, 2011.
 U.N. CCPR, Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Sri Lanka, U.N. Doc. CCPR/CO/79/LKA, Dec. 1, 2003.
 U,N.G.A., Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the UPR: Sri Lanka, paras. 39, 56, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/8/46, Jun. 5, 2008.
David Averbuck, The Sepala Ekanayake Case—Domestic Sri Lankan Law Incorporates International Law, Sri Lanka J. of Intl. Law. Vol. 1, p. 1, 1989.
Among others, we found the ColumboPage online newspaper informative on death penalty issues:http://www.colombopage.com/.
Our best source of information regarding death row demographics was an interview published by the Lanka Journal: Lanka Journal, Death Penalty Under Review-Sri Lanka Prisons Commissioner, http://www.lankajournal.com/2009/08/death-penalty-under-review-sri-lanka-prisons-commissioner/, Aug. 30, 2009.
NYU’s resource was helpful in guiding our legal research: Aquinas V. Tambimuttu, Sri Lanka: Legal Research and Legal System, GlobaLex, http://www.nyulawglobal.org/Globalex/Sri_Lanka.htm, Jan. 2009.
Sri Lanka’s free online database of statutes (and some cases) was instrumental in describing the scope of the law: http://www.lawnet.lk/, as was the World Legal Information Institute: http://www.worldlii.org/lk/.

References: art. 285
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 129
 art. 118
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 44
 art. 118
 art. 131
 art. 131
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 art. 34
 art. 131
 art. 131
 art. 118
 v. 
 v. 
 art. 262
 art. 77
 art. 338
 art. 12
 art. 23
 art. 34
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 art. 131
 art. 131
 art. 118
 V. 
 art. 161
 art. 11
 art. 450
 art. 114
 art. 13
 art. 41
 V.