2026-02-06 / Debate: Extension of Emergency Regulations under Public Security Ordinance 2026-02-06
## Summary
Deputy Minister Aravinda Senarath spoke in support of extending the Emergency declaration to coordinate the government's response to the "Ditva" cyclone, arguing that Emergency powers are necessary to align multiple institutions — including Lands, Irrigation, Roads, Disaster Management, Health, and the Tri-Forces — for effective disaster relief and reconstruction. He stated that damage from the cyclone runs into hundreds of billions of rupees, affecting agriculture, irrigation infrastructure, schools, and religious sites across areas including Gampola, Nuwara Eliya, and Badulla, with full assessment still ongoing. Rejecting Opposition criticism, he argued that the current government's use of Emergency is strictly limited to disaster management purposes, contrasting it with what he characterised as the Opposition's historical misuse of Emergency powers to suppress political dissent, protests, and media. He dismissed Opposition objections — including those relating to vehicle leasing and quarry licensing — as politically motivated, and asserted that Sri Lanka has restored near-normal daily life in affected areas within approximately three months of the disaster.
Madam Deputy Chairperson, we discuss extending Emergency to better manage the disaster caused by the “Ditva” cyclone. Although there are various instruments and orders available, the most suitable course now is to enforce Emergency so that institutions and officials can be coordinated to deliver maximum service to the public. The President seeks it solely for managing the “Ditva” situation.
The Opposition views Emergency through the lens of how they used it—beyond core purposes, to crush opposing politics, to suppress those who challenged them: teachers, public servants, professionals, citizens, youth, students and even monks. They know the weight of Emergency because they used it to deny people the freedom to move and protest.
We assure the people and even the Opposition Members: however “frightening” Emergency may seem, we have removed that fear by using it only to serve the public fairly—to deliver relief and services. That is the difference with our Government.
“Ditva” is one of the gravest recent tragedies. Though full assessment is still underway, the damage runs into hundreds of billions of rupees across agriculture, tanks and canals, small industries, industries, schools, temples and other religious sites. Managing this requires extensive inter‑agency coordination—Lands, Irrigation, Roads, Security, Disaster Management, Buildings Research, Geology, Police, Health and the Tri‑Forces. Bringing the entire institutional system together for a common purpose is how we can overcome this disaster. That is the plan, and that is why we extend Emergency—to use its provisions for rapid coordination.
Instead of focusing on the positive, the Opposition nitpicks—someone even tried to link vehicle leasing issues to Emergency. Another raised a quarry: we are examining that; many such licenses were issued during their tenure. Environmental degradation today stems from development pushed without regard for ecosystems by past rulers. The responsibility lies with those now in the Opposition. We are working to reverse environmental damage.
Among countries that quickly restore normal life after disasters, Sri Lanka stands out this time. Many developed economies struggled, but we rapidly stabilized day‑to‑day life after “Ditva.” We do not claim 100% completion—compensation, houses, fields, tanks and dams are still being restored. But within about three months since the disaster, in Gampola, Nuwara Eliya, Badulla and elsewhere, people have restarted normal life. The President is continuously intervening. We minimize debate and maximize intervention—so the Opposition will have to find new talking points. We will restore all that can be restored, though we cannot bring back lost lives. The Opposition’s arguments against extending Emergency are wrong and come from defeated politicians.
They speak of media suppression—yet those who used Emergency to burn media houses now posture about press freedom. The National People’s Power has used media freedom responsibly; the public will not buy the Opposition’s shouting matches and daily voice‑cuts. Oppose the Government if you wish, but do not oppose the country. What Sri Lanka needs is unified, national‑purpose politics. We are ready to defeat mudslinging with the truth. I conclude.
Thank you.