Sign in
    • Home
    • Categories
      arrow_drop_down
      • Safety of Journalist
      • Media ownership
      • Media Reform Direction
      • Nature and technology of media structure
      • Professionalism and rights
      • Promoting freedom of speech & expression
      • Rights of the audience & media literacy
      • The nature of regulation
    • About Media Reform
    • History: On This Day
    • Links
      arrow_drop_down
      • Free Media Movement Sri Lanka
      • Media Reform Lanka
    • Contact

    AMARATUNGAv.SIRIMAL AND OTHERS(JANA GHOSHA CASE)

    AMARATUNGA/ JANA GHOSHA CASE/ FERNANDO J., DHEERARATNE J. AND RAMANATHAN J./ 468/92 / Right of freedom ofspeech and expression Criticism of the Government.

    • Publication
    • Call now
    • Direct message
    • Leave a review
    • Bookmark
    • Share
    • Report
    Title

    AMARATUNGAv.SIRIMAL AND OTHERS(JANA GHOSHA CASE)

    Gallery
    Description

    Several political parties including the Sri Lanka Freedom Party decided to show their disapproval of the policies and actions of the Government on a range of issues. It was decided to harmonize their protests, nationwide by means of a 15-minute noisy cacophony of protests (Jana Ghosha): the ringing of bells, tooting of motor vehicle horns, beating of drums, banging of saucepans so that there might resound throughout the nation, a deafening din of disapproval. The petitioner, a member of the S.L.F.P. and a member of the Pradeshiya Sabha of Horana was one such participant at Ingiriya. The petitioner voiced his protest by beating a drum. When he did not heed the police order to stop beating the drum, he was assaulted and his drum broken with a rice pounder. The crowd of protesters shouted slogans against the Government and formed a cordon across the road. Tear gas and a baton charge were used to disperse the crowd.
    Held:
    1. The Police did not have reason to apprehend a breach of the peace. The action by the Police was simply because anti Government slogans were being shouted.
    2. The petitioner's fundamental right of speech and expression was violated

    Categories
    • Professionalism and rights
    Author

    SUPREME COURT. FERNANDO J., DHEERARATNE J. AND RAMANATHAN J.

    Publisher

    SUPREME COURT.

    Published Year

    1993 Feb 03

    Language

    English

    Files
    • AMARATUNGA-Vs-Sirimal-Janagosha.pdf View

    You May Also Be Interested In

    Arbitration Act No.11 of 1995

    English

    Digital Media Workers Survey

    Sinhala, Tamil, English

    Code of Professional Practice (Code of Ethics) of the Editors’ Guild of Sri Lanka, adopted by the Press Complaints Commission of Sri Lanka

    English

    © FMM Sri Lanka - Designed by DreamdesignerLK

      • Facebook
      • Twitter
      • WhatsApp
      • Telegram
      • LinkedIn
      • Tumblr
      • VKontakte
      • Mail
      • Copy link