By Kelum Bandara and Yohan Perera
Colombo, Oct. 13 (Daily Mirror) - The Joint Opposition yesterday continued its criticism of the government over presenting Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thera in prison attire, saying that the disrobing of a Buddhist monk was not a matter to be decided by a court but should be determined according to the procedures laid down in Buddhist monastic discipline, or Vinaya.
Addressing the weekly press conference, its convener, Prof. G.L. Peiris, said that a monk lost his status as a Bhikkhu within his order if he committed any of the four offences known as *Pārājika*, as described in the Pali Canon.
Indulgence in sexual intercourse, theft, homicide and falsely claiming higher spiritual attainments were the four offences that could lead to a monk being disrobed, he said. Otherwise, a monk could voluntarily give up his robes.
He said these offences were irreversible under Buddhist monastic discipline and were metaphorically compared to a palmyrah palm being cut off from its stem.
Prof. Peiris said Article 16(1) of the 1978 Constitution of Sri Lanka provided that all existing written and unwritten laws remained valid and operative, even if they were inconsistent with the chapter on Fundamental Rights. However, he said the Constitution also upheld Buddhist traditions, even where they conflicted with Fundamental Rights.
He also said Article 9 granted Buddhism the “foremost place” and imposed a duty on the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana while assuring freedom to all religions. According to him, the Buddha Sasana encompassed a broader concept than the Buddhist religion in this instance.
Prof. Peiris said Ven. Gnanasara Thera had been allowed to wear his robes alongside other prisoners when he was imprisoned during the tenure of former President Maithripala Sirisena.
“This was affirmed by both the former Minister and then Justice Minister Thalatha Atukorale,” he said.
“There is a procedure laid down in the rules and regulations relating to prison attire,” he said.
Quoting Regulation 550 of the Prison Standing Orders, Prof. Peiris said it stipulated that convicted prisoners should not be taken to court in standard prison uniforms but should be permitted to wear the clothing they normally wore in accordance with their religious and cultural backgrounds before their conviction.
As a result, he said there was no need to appoint a committee to look into the matter, as the law was sufficiently clear.