07. GENDER AND SEXUAL EXPRESSION The right to sexual expression comes within the right to freedom of expression as it is no less important than political and religious expression. A feminist approach to freedom of expression entails expanding the traditional idea of freedom of expression to “understand it as freedom for our voices, bodies, sexualities, work, hobbies, relationships, communities, organising and all other aspects of our lives to take up space online and on ground” (Perera, 2023) without being subject to surveillance, censorship, violence and other forms of control. Globally, feminist and queer expression in the online space has been subject to control and surveillance, and this must be recognised as a part of a larger political project of censorship and curtailing of fundamental freedoms (Expression, n.d.). This section will focus on the Sri Lankan context of curtailing freedom of expression in relation to gender and sexual identities. Sri Lankan laws such as the Obscene Publication Ordinance No. 4 of 1921, the Penal Code, and the Vagrants Ordinance No. 4 of 1841 are widely used to curtail the expression of gender and sexual identities both online and offline. These pieces of legislation were introduced during the colonial project with the aim of regulating and censoring gender and sexual identities because the colonised were viewed as “hypersexual, degenerate savages who needed to be civilised and enlightened through a benevolent European civilising project” (Wanniarachchi & Samarajiva, 2021). In 2021, a couple who were involved in filming an explicit video at the Pahanthudawa waterfall in Balangoda were arrested, given a one-month imprisonment and subjected to a fine on the basis that they could “potentially tarnish the reputation of Sri Lanka” (Weragoda & Medawala, 2022). The video was trending across all social media platforms and widely shared on personal messaging apps such as WhatsApp (Irugalbandara & Gunatilake, 2021). Much of the public conversation surrounding the incident focused on the ‘indecency’ of the video and the impact it had on Sri Lanka’s ‘cultural security’. Religious leaders wrote to the President stressing the urgency to take down the video, and warned that tourists will get “the wrong idea about the Sri Lankan tourism industry” as a result of this video. Many were of the opinion that inaction would result in normalising “indecent” behaviour for our children, and setting an unhealthy example of “acceptable behaviour”. While it was not confirmed under which laws the couple were arrested, lawyers and legal experts were of the opinion that they were likely to be charged under both the Obscene Publications Ordinance and the Penal Code. Section 2 of the Ordinance prohibits selling, distributing, importing/exporting or printing for sale or hire, making or producing, or publicly exhibiting any “obscene writings, drawings, prints, paintings, printed matter, pictures, posters, emblems, photographs, cinematograph films, video cassettes, or any other obscene objects”. Section 285 of the Penal Code essentially covers the same elements, although it does not deal with the making or - 21 -