By: Isuru Parakrama
March 17, Colombo (LNW): The Attorney General’s Office has come under fire in the accusation of being a legal shield to teachers and principals who use corporal punishment to children.
Prominent child rights advocate Dr Thushara Wickramanayake has launched a scathing critique of the Attorney General’s Department, accusing the office of undermining the Constitution by providing a legal shield to teachers and principals who use corporal punishment on children.
In an open appeal addressed to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Prime Minister Dr Harini Amarasuriya, and the Ministers of Justice and Women and Child Affairs, Dr Wickramanayake called for the immediate withdrawal of a controversial police circular dating back to 2009.
The “Two-Tier” Justice System
The core of the dispute lies in a directive issued by the Attorney General on August 07, 2009. The circular instructs Sri Lanka Police to refer all complaints of physical abuse involving school staff to the AG’s office before taking further action, provided the incident occurred during school hours and the injuries are deemed “not serious.”
Dr Wickramanayake argues that this directive creates a legal loophole specifically for educators, effectively preventing the immediate arrest and prosecution of those accused of child cruelty.
“Section 12 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka states that the law must be equal for every citizen and must be implemented equally,” she noted. “Why is the law being bent specifically for teachers while no other profession receives such special treatment?”
Mental Trauma Ignored
A significant point of contention raised by Dr Wickramanayake is the failure to account for psychological harm. Under Section 308A of the Penal Code, “Child Cruelty” encompasses both physical and mental abuse.
Dr Wickramanayake questioned the AG’s criteria for “serious” injury, asking: How can the AG assess a child’s mental trauma through a circular? Does the lack of visible scarring mean no crime was committed? By delaying legal advice for nearly a decade in some cases, is the AG’s office acting as a “secondary abuser” by allowing offenders to remain in classrooms?
A Call for Executive Action
The activist described the current state of child protection as a “farce,” stating that the Attorney General cannot act as “judge and jury” by overriding statutory laws through administrative circulars. She argued that the directive prioritises administrative convenience over the “best interests of the child.”
The appeal concludes with a firm demand to the new administration to uphold the rule of law and ensure that school environments are safe for all children, regardless of the perpetrator’s professional status.
