06. ETHNORELIGIOUS CONFLICT Following a prolonged 30-year civil conflict, Sri Lanka continues to grapple with deeply ingrained ethnoreligious tensions. The historical interaction between the majority Sinhala and minority Tamil and Muslim ethnic groups, coupled with diverse religious affiliations including Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity, has been a prominent source of discord. The legacy of the civil war which concluded in 2009 remains vivid in the collective consciousness, leaving unresolved grievances and breeding distrust among communities. The intertwining of ethnicity and religion further complicates the situation, leading to instances of discrimination and violence. To better contextualise this backdrop, it is essential to understand the formal recognition of Buddhism to be the ‘foremost’ religion of the country, as stated in the Constitution (Article 9), with the State being entrusted to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana. This is juxtaposed with the absence of explicit blasphemy laws, yet individuals can still face repercussions for offending Buddhism. PROSECUTION FOR DISTURBING RELIGIOUS HARMONY The case of Razik Mohamed Ramzy v B.M.A.S.K. Senaratne & Others serves as a poignant illustration of the Sri Lankan government’s tendency to prosecute individuals or groups under the guise of ‘national interest’, thereby stifling freedom of expression based on ethnicity or religious beliefs. Razik’s arrest in April 2020 by the CID and subsequent detention stemmed from a Facebook post he made in Sinhala, advocating for Muslims to engage in an ‘ideological jihad’ using pens and keyboards. However, Razik, a Sri Lankan Muslim and former public servant, maintained that his post was a response to what he perceived as a malicious campaign blaming Muslims for the spread of COVID-19, which elicited death threats against him. Despite proactive measures such as self-censorship and lodging complaints about threats to the Inspector General of Police, Razik found himself facing serious charges. Razik faced charges under three Sections of different legal acts. Firstly, he was charged under Section 120 of the Penal Code, which deals with ‘exciting or attempting to excite disaffection’. Secondly, he faced allegations under Section 3(1) of the ICCPR Act, pertaining to the propagation of war or advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred leading to incitement of discrimination, hostility, or violence. Finally, he was accused under Section 6 of the Computer Crimes Act No. 24 of 2007 for intentionally causing a computer to perform functions endangering national security, the national economy, or public order. - 15 -