Senaka Weeraratna 

Sri Lanka’s Legal Education system values uncritically the inheritance of Roman – Dutch Law but nobody has ever complained that the very same Roman Dutch law was used by the Dutch East India Company to issue Placarts banning Buddhism and Hinduism as Cannibal faiths in 1711 and 1732. 

Sri Lanka’s law schools have yet to draw attention to this unpardonable failing in the Dutch colonial administration and Roman – Dutch Law that is still misleadingly taught as a neutral framework of legal principles. It has always been an instrument of colonial control especially in South Africa during Apartheid Rule. This is not part of the conversation in Sri Lanka’s law schools. 

AI Overview Response

This is a profound observation on the historical friction between colonial legal structures and indigenous culture.

While Roman-Dutch Law provides the foundation for our civil matters (like contracts and delicts), the Placaten (edicts) you mentioned highlight its origins as an instrument of colonial control. The 1711 and 1732 edicts were designed to consolidate the Dutch Reformed Church’s authority by criminalizing “heathen” practices. 

The reason this often goes “uncomplaining” in modern legal education is likely due to the compartmentalization of the law:

• Public Law Evolution: The British, and later the post-independence Republic, largely superseded Dutch religious prohibitions through the introduction of English Law principles and, eventually, constitutional protections for religious freedom.
• The “Common Law” Label: Students are often taught to view Roman-Dutch Law as a neutral, technical framework for private rights rather than a political tool of the VOC (Dutch East India Company). 

This creates a paradox where a system once used to suppress local identity is now upheld as a pillar of Sri Lanka’s jurisprudence.

https://share.google/aimode/9tQRhzzL9Zd6HEqLV

AI Overview

………………………..

see also

https://share.google/aimode/PNKABlS6V18zFw3oT

The assertion that Sri Lanka’s legal education system uncritically values the inheritance of Roman-Dutch Law (RDL) is a topic of contemporary debate, particularly regarding how the colonial context of this law is taught. While Roman-Dutch Law is formally recognized as the residual “common law” of the island and is highly influential in areas like land, property, and delict, its application during the Dutch East India Company (VOC) era (1658–1796) was fundamentally tools for control rather than a neutral legal system. . 

While Roman-Dutch Law is formally recognized as the residual “common law” of the island and is highly influential in areas like land, property, and delict, its application during the Dutch East India Company (VOC) era (1658–1796) was fundamentally tools for control rather than a neutral legal system. 

Regarding the use of Roman-Dutch law to regulate religious practices:

• Colonial Restriction of Faiths: The Dutch, acting in their interest and guided by Calvinist zeal, prohibited Roman Catholicism and restricted the practices of Buddhism and Hinduism in the maritime provinces they controlled.
• The VOC’s Role: The VOC introduced Roman-Dutch law, which was applied alongside local customary laws (such as Thesawalamai and Kandyan Law) and used to regulate social and religious behavior to ensure the dominance of the Protestant faith.
• Treatment of Practices: Colonial authorities often deemed indigenous practices to be uncivilized or superstitious in their efforts to impose European social and religious norms, with church and state intimately connected under VOC administration.
• Revaluation of Legal History: Recent studies, such as those by Nadeera Rupesinghe, challenge the traditional, uncritical teaching of Roman-Dutch Law, promoting a deeper understanding of legal pluralism and how local communities actually navigated these colonial laws. 

The “adoption” of this legal framework by the British in 1796 did lead to the gradual abolishment of specific, exceptionally harsh Dutch-era practices, such as torture and certain capital punishments, as highlighted in colonial ordinances. 

However, the foundational reliance on a system that was initially imposed as a tool of a commercial entity (the VOC) remains a key area of study for legal historians examining the nuances of Sri Lanka’s mixed legal system. 

AI Overview