No Animal Rights Law in Sri Lanka
Posted on August 20th, 2013

Excerpt from The Daily Mirror, Sri Lanka / 13 April 2011

With the cruelty towards animals increasing in leaps and bounds, the outraged cry of animal rights activists are to be heard, condemning acts of cruelty and demanding that the ill-used law be brought forth and action be taken.  Many suggestions and requests have been made with petitions now being signed to ban the slaughter of animals, but the government is yet to make a move towards updating laws activists say have been enacted during the British rule that are now redundant.

Laws and the changes that need to take place

 Animal rights activists say that not only does the existing law need to be changed to bring together all acts dealing with cruelty under one such law, but that the existing laws of the country need to be fully explored. With many not knowing the law while others simply not following it, there have been a rising cry of outrage from animal activists alleging that more need to be done for these gentle beings who suffer in silence. The Sri Lanka Animal Rights Protection Association (SLAPA) said though there have been amendments to the laws of the country dealing with cruelty towards animals, they were those put in place during the British rule. The recent amendments to the act they say have been done with much difficulty with continuous lobbying by activists.

“According to the amendments in the new law, cattle that have been confiscated during illegal transportation can now be given to animal care organizations and they could be used for agricultural purposes,” said SLAPA, Lorraine Bibile. She explains that previously any of the cattle confiscated in such a manner was handed over to the owner once legal proceedings had ended making such laws on animal protection redundant.

“Apart from this, we find that most people do not know the laws when it comes to animal cruelty or they simply do not follow it and laugh the matter off,” she said. Ms. Bible explained that many did not go to the police station to complain of cruelty towards animals as they were laughed at, therefore the Association made it a point to arm animal lovers with a copy of the law when making a complaint to the police. Prominent Environmentalist, Jagath Gunawardane on the other hand said that though the law in the country needed to be changed, the existing law should be fully exploited and fines increased. “The laws that we have now mostly relate to cattle and I think that all laws for animals should brought together under one umbrella where all animals are given the same rights,” he said. Mr. Gunawardane held animal rights groups responsible for the lack of usage of the laws.

“Unlike in the protection of wildlife, there is a clear consensus among the society that cruelty towards animals is wrong, therefore they only have to enforce it,” Mr. Gunawardane stated. He explained that many activists often had no clear cut strategy or action plan, thus leaving environmentalist the unavoidable task of assisting those who do not have any idea of the legal background. Mr. Gunawardane said that a network had to be built within the society to enable interested parties to contact activists and that action, whether it is legal or not should be taken at the proper time. “The new act that has not been taken up in parliament as yet, goes into more details about cruelty, the fines as well as more information on the confiscations and punishments given,” he said.

Animal rights activist and President of Sathva Mithra, Sagarica Rajakaruna said there was a need for a special authority that would look into the rights of animals as the police, under whose purview this came did not have the time or the necessary man power to do so. “Things such as animal rights have not become a main issue with the politicians as people do not raise it to become a major issue during elections as something that needs to be addressed,” she said. Other activists such as Narendra Gunathilake agreed that all existing laws for animal cruelty should be brought together as one. “There are many contradictions in the laws with a lot of loop holes that need to be covered,” he said. Mr. Gunathilake pointed out the definitions in some acts as an example. “In one act the word cow means just the cow but in another it also includes animals such as the pig and the goat as well,” he explained.

The controversy that was

 Munneshwaram Kovil – Activist, Narendra Gunathilake explained they were afraid the number of animal sacrificed would have increased in comparison to the previous year as the war had just ended.

“We understand that as law abiding citizens that we cannot take the law into our hands, which is why we made a formal complaint to the police,” he said. Mr. Gunathilake explained they were sure there were no valid permits for the animals or permits saying they were suitable for consumption.

He explained that even though, the slaughter at Munneshwaram was a tradition that had been there for years, tradition was not above the law as everyone should follow the laws laid out by the state when slaughtering an animal.

“Our final aim to stop the slaughter of animals but we know that this is not a possibility unless there are discussions between communities, a dialogue among all religions and a decision and compromise is arrived upon,” he said.

Mr. Gunathilake stated there was a need for the change in the law as the fine for the illegal transportation of cattle was just Rs. 100 according to the laws set out in 1893, which when put into the modern context was a ridiculous sum.

SLAPA explains that many of the cruelties towards animals take place due to ignorance, where people do not understand or know how animals are to be treated. “When we talk to most people they think that tying up a dog or keeping it in a kennel all the time is what you need to do but they do not understand that they too are beings that need to move around and not be kept walled up in one place,” said Ms. Ratnayake.

Environmentalist Jagath Gunawardane on the other hand said that he does not see ignorance but deliberate cruelty to animals the most. “There are types of fish that we import, that can consume only a particular type of sea weed, but once these fish are caught and exported, they die of starvation as they do not have proper food,” he said.

He explained that when animals are tied up and not given the food to eat it is deliberate cruelty rather than ignorance that prompts the action.

4 Responses to “No Animal Rights Law in Sri Lanka”

  1. Fran Diaz Says:

    Slaughter of Animals in Sacrifice was allowed in ANCIENT religions, except in Buddhism and parts of Hinduism. In most religions allowing animal sacrifice, it was thought that SIN could be expiated through the sacrifice of an animal in the place of sacrificing the human ‘sinner’. This is pure Ignorance.

    The only saving grace was that the meat of the animal so sacrificed was shared among the members of the community.

    In modern times, COOKED meats could be brought to the Temples and shared among the devotees in a type of ‘dhane’ to gain Merit to expiate Sins, as the expiation of SIN appears to be the main reason for Animal Slaughter.

    Are there other reasons to slaughter poor dumb animals at temples ?

  2. Fran Diaz Says:

    Here are some views on Animal Sacrifice in Buddhism & Hinduism :

    Is has been stated in orthodox Hindu texts like the Atharva Veda, and Buddhist and Jain texts that true Vedic sacrifices were of fruits and grains, that had metaphorical names of animals.
    In the Buddhist Suttanipata section of Vinaya Pitaka, the “Brahmana Dhammika Sutta” portion confirms that the ancient Brahmins did not commit any animal sacrifice as one except from it reads “they made sacrifices of rice, butter, etc and never killed the cows, the best friends of man, the giver of medicines”. Also in the Buddhist Mahasupina Jataka and Lohakumbhi Jataka declares that Brahmin Sariputra in a previous life was a Brahmin that prevented animal sacrifice by declaring that animal sacrifice was actually against the Vedas.
    A Jain sage intereprets the Vedic sacrifices as metaphorical:
    “Body is the altar, mind is the fire blazing with the ghee of knowledge and burning the sacrificial sticks of impurities produced from the tree of karma;…

    The Buddha condemned ritual animal sacrifice.The First Precept of Buddhism prohibits any type of killing. More specifically, Brahmanism, the dominant religion in northern India at the time of the Buddha included sacrifice (Yajna) including animal slaughter. The Tipiṭaka records one sacrifice where ’five hundred bulls, five hundred steers and numerous heifers, goats and rams were brought to the sacrificial post for slaughter”. The Buddha criticized these bloody rituals as being “wasteful, ineffective and cruel”

  3. Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha Says:

    If there are no animal rights laws in modern Sri Lanka it is because such laws and Royal decrees that banned animal cruelty were removed by alien foreign forces. Sri Lanka’s culture already has these laws as part of the Buddhist doctrine.
    I sincerely hope that Sri Lanka acknowledge she is a Buddhist nation and make Buddhism a state faith which then will define the Constitution and give powers to remove unsavory elements such as the Caste system and animal sacrifice, Sharia laws among the Muslims and like in Muslim land demand that Muslims and Hindu Tamils honor the teachings of the Buddha and obey its laws.

  4. Fran Diaz Says:


    It is not enough to have the Buddhist doctrine to govern the country. That was in the past, under the Lanka kings. Now it is the written Constitution & the LAW of the land that governs the country. We have to re-write the laws on a number of topics. T


    Most Sinhala/Buddhists have NOT got the point that the Buddhist doctrine is NOT the law of the land. More and more Sinhala/Buddhists have to study LAW in order to protect the land the People here. Even Buddhist priests ought to study LAW for that purpose.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2021 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress