The Sri Lanka Police warns Facebook users about obscene comments on its official page, sparking debate on freedom of expression and digital policing. Experts and citizens question legal clarity, transparency, and constitutional rights.
The Sri Lanka Police’s official Facebook page has become the focus of intense public attention after the department warned that it would begin taking action against users posting obscene language in comments.
In a post published on July 2, the police stated that while it welcomes public opinions and criticism, individuals who use vulgar language on its official Facebook page would face consequences. The department emphasized that such behavior harms the dignity of the commenters themselves and issued a warning that steps would be taken against offenders.
The statement stirred a wide range of reactions. Some Facebook users argued that if action is taken against the public for offensive language, there should also be mechanisms to hold police officers accountable when they behave disrespectfully.
One user commented, “The way some police officers speak to people is anything but polite,” while others wrote, “Clean up your own house before policing others.”
This is the official Facebook page of the Sri Lanka Police
If your comments on this page include obscene language,
please be informed that such comments tarnish your own image and character.
Further, we kindly request you to express your views and criticisms with civility and responsibility,
in a manner that upholds mutual respect and social ethics.
Obscene comments damage your own social dignity and identity.
Steps will be taken in the future to remove and report users
who repeatedly violate these guidelines through the use of vulgar or inappropriate language.
Attorney Thishya Weragoda posted a critical reply highlighting the broader issue: “Police officers need to be educated about Article 11 of the Constitution. The use of obscenities, violence against suspects, and filing of false cases erodes public trust.”
However, questions were raised about the lack of a clearly stated code of conduct for commenting on the police’s Facebook page.
Dr. Sanjana Hattotuwa, a social media researcher, noted that there’s no published guideline on what the police consider “obscene.” He told BBC Sinhala, “There’s no clarification. Without clearly stating which words are unacceptable, it’s impossible for users to know the boundaries.”
He added, “Some words are subjective. They may be used in criticism or satire. It’s important that the police define what’s allowed and what isn’t in a transparent code of conduct.”
Dr. Hattotuwa stressed that in a country like Sri Lanka, where social media can be used as a platform for civic expression, blanket warnings without clarity are problematic. “This message by the police creates uncertainty about where the limits lie.”
He further criticized the vagueness of the warning. “The post doesn’t specify what kind of action will be taken. Will Facebook users be blocked from the page? Will their accounts be suspended? Or will the police visit their homes, arrest them, and detain them?”
He warned that with the Online Safety Act now in effect, such vague posts could create a chilling effect on public expression. “A clearer approach would have been to just state, ‘Obscene language damages your own image,’ and then list acceptable and unacceptable behavior.”
“Given Sri Lanka’s past with censorship and digital surveillance, the tone of this warning feels less like a reminder and more like a veiled threat,” he said.
In a related development, Rukshan Priyantha, a citizen, has filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission, alleging that his rights to freedom of expression, access to information, and digital participation were violated after being blocked from the Sri Lanka Police Facebook page.
I filed a complaint today at the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka against the unlawful blocking of my access to the Sri Lanka Police official Facebook page. As a Sri Lankan citizen, I believe that my fundamental rights to freedom of expression, right to information, and digital rights were violated by this action.
I have never used a fake account, nor have I posted any content that breaches community guidelines. If I am being blocked simply for criticizing the Police or the state, without using abusive or obscene language, isn’t that a violation of my rights? And even if someone does post criticism, shouldn’t they still be allowed to hold an opinion?
I urge the authorities and relevant institutions to take appropriate action and provide me with justice.
I sincerely thank Anuruddha Bandara | Anuruddha Bandara, the respected human rights activist, for supporting me in drafting and filing this complaint at the Commission.
This is not about me alone. I am doing this for every Sri Lankan citizen who was silenced unfairly online. You may not have the time or resources to take legal action, but I do. So I am fighting for all of us. You are not alone.
I do not want theA Police to become enemies of the people. I want them to be allies of the people.
Let’s reclaim our fundamental digital rights as Sri Lankans! 🇱🇰
In a post on his own social media, Priyantha explained that his complaint was aimed at defending public rights and ensuring a more democratic digital environment.
In response to inquiries from BBC Sinhala, Police Media Spokesman Assistant Superintendent F.U. Wutler said the department was only trying to keep its page civil:
“People have commented using foul language, and that’s not appropriate. Since the page is accessed by a wide audience, we have to remove such users. It’s just not acceptable,” he said.
Yet, with no clarity on what legal or social media measures will be enforced, the ambiguity of the Sri Lanka Police’s Facebook policy continues to stir debate among legal experts, digital rights activists, and the public.
About the Author
