Harini Amarasuriya’s Name in Constitutional Reform Report Is from 2016, Not Government Policy!

Join our WhatsApp channel here for daily fact checks.

Religion and the national flag are among the most sensitive subjects in Sri Lankan politics, so any hint that the government plans to change them spreads quickly. Several social media posts did exactly that, sharing pages from a constitutional reform report that lists Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya alongside proposals for a secular state and a new national flag. The posts framed the report as reforms the current government was about to implement. Here are the posts that carried the claim, followed by what the document really is.

Social Media Posts:

The posts highlighted certain recommendations in the report, which is titled “Public Representations Committee on Constitutional Reform”. They also highlighted the current Prime Minister, Harini Amarasuriya, as a member of that committee. The posts specifically emphasised these two recommendations:

• 3.1.2 National Flag: “To design a new national flag keeping in line with the recommendation for a secular State and representing Sri Lankan collective life without reference to ethnicity”

• 4.2 Religion: “Sri Lanka shall be a secular state.”

Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya’s name was highlighted under both recommendations.

Facebook | Archived Link

Another post citing the same report suggested that these reforms were to be implemented by the current government.

Facebook | Archived Link | FB

Fact-Check:

We checked whether a public consultation or committee recommendation on constitutional reform like the one shown in the posts had emerged in 2026. Parliamentary news and major media reports showed no official source recording such an event.

We found no report of the government proposing recommendations in 2026 to “make Sri Lanka a secular state” or “create a new flag”. The Cabinet Spokesperson also said on July 21, 2026, that the government had not yet decided to introduce a new constitution (here).

Sri Lanka currently operates under the 1978 Constitution, which has been amended 22 times, including the 22nd Amendment passed on September 25, 2026 (here).

The current Constitution gives Buddhism the foremost place

Article 9 in Chapter II of the 1978 Constitution gives Buddhism the foremost place. It states:

“The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place, and accordingly, it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e).”

Sri Lanka is therefore constitutionally not a “secular state”.

The national flag is fixed by Article 6 and the Second Schedule

Article 6 in Chapter I of the Constitution states: “The National Flag of the Republic of Sri Lanka shall be the Lion Flag depicted in the Second Schedule.” The exact design is specified by the illustration in the Second Schedule.

Amending Article 6 or Article 9 requires more than a two-thirds majority in Parliament. It also requires the approval of the people at a referendum under Article 83.

No constitutional amendment has changed the status of Buddhism (Article 9) or the national flag (Article 6). Both remain as they were in 1978. The current Constitution is available in English here and in Sinhala here.

The government’s only constitutional change in 2026 was the 22nd Amendment on judges’ retirement ages.

This is the only change the current government made to the Constitution in 2026. It is not a new constitution. It is an amendment to the provisions on judges in the existing 1978 Constitution.

• The 22nd Amendment Bill was gazetted on August 7, 2026 (here). It was presented to Parliament on August 18, when Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara moved the first reading (here).

• Key changes: the retirement age of Supreme Court judges rose from 65 to 67 and that of Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65. The number of Court of Appeal judges rose from 19 to 24. The Chief Justice’s term was capped at six years or age 67 (here).

• The accompanying Judicature (Amendment) Act raised the retirement age of High Court judges from 61 to 63, and that of District Judges and Magistrates from 60 to 62. Sources differ on this, so verify against the final text of the Act.

• After examining 67 petitions (according to court reports), the Supreme Court bench ruled that the amendment did not need a referendum and could be passed by a special majority in Parliament. Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne announced the ruling in Parliament on September 22, 2026 (here and here).

• The amendment passed on September 25 with 158 votes in favour and 63 against. It came into effect when the Speaker signed the certificate (here).

The government has not decided to introduce a new constitution.

• July 21, 2026: Cabinet Spokesperson Minister Nalinda Jayatissa said that, despite nearly two years in power, the government had not yet decided to introduce a new constitution (here).

• August 3, 2026: President Anura Kumara Dissanayake told an alliance of Tamil and Muslim parties that he was committed to abolishing the executive presidency, but that building national consensus took priority over a hastily drafted amendment (here).

• February 2026: The Justice Minister was reported to have said that no constitutional drafting committee had been appointed and no timeline had been set (here).

We will update this article if the government’s stance changes.

The document in the posts is a 10-year-old report, not a recent one.

The report in the posts is the “Public Representations Committee on Constitutional Reform” report, compiled in 2016 from public views and proposals gathered for drafting a new constitution for Sri Lanka. The full report is available in Sinhala here and in English here.

To introduce a new constitution, a Cabinet sub-committee was appointed at the Cabinet meeting of November 18, 2015. That meeting decided to set up a special committee to gather public input (here). According to the report, the Cabinet appointed this 20-member committee, chaired by Lal Wijenayaka, on December 22, 2015. Cabinet media releases noted 24 members (here). Current Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya served on the committee in 2016 as a university academic (here). A 2016 analysis noted that the committee included academics, lawyers, and political party nominees (here).

The committee gathered public opinion through several methods. It split into groups and toured every district in the island, meeting citizens at Divisional Secretariats and District Offices to record oral evidence (here). The report is dated May 10, 2016. It contains the public feedback received and the committee’s recommendations.

The 2016 report lists alternative options, not a single recommendation

Where the committee could not reach consensus on sensitive or contested issues, such as religion or the nature of the state, it did not give a single recommendation. Instead, it included all the alternative views put forward by members for the Constitutional Assembly to consider.

Section 4.2 of Chapter 4 (“Religion”) lists six alternatives. The Committee could not agree, so “as a compromise” it recommended the different formulations of the members “as alternative recommendations for the consideration of the Constitutional Assembly” (here). The six alternatives read:

• (i) “Retain Article 9 (Chapter II) of the current Constitution with no change.”

• (ii) “Heading of Chapter II of the current Constitution should state ‘Religions’ and not Buddhism and retain Article 9 as it is with no change.”

• (iii) “Reformulate Article 9 of the current Constitution as follows: ‘The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give all religions equal status. The State shall protect and foster Buddhism and the Buddha Sāsana while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e) of the current Constitution.’”

• (iv) “Sri Lanka shall be a secular State.” The footnotes show this was proposed by five members, including Harini Amarasuriya.

• (v) “Sri Lanka shall be a secular State while recognising the role of religion in the spiritual development of people.” The footnotes show this was proposed by one other member.

• (vi) “Heading of Chapter II of the current Constitution should State ‘Religions’. The clause should be revised as follows: ‘The Republic of Sri Lanka will give all religions equal status’”

Section 3.1.2 of Chapter 3 also presents three alternative recommendations on the national flag. They are introduced with the words “Based on the above submissions, the Committee has developed the following recommendations for consideration”:

• (a) “To design a new national flag keeping in line with the recommendation for a secular State and representing Sri Lankan collective life without reference to ethnicity.” The footnotes show this was proposed by six members, including Harini Amarasuriya.

• (b) “To design a new flag symbolizing the equality of all ethnic groups and peace and harmony amongst them.” The footnotes show this was proposed by one member.

• (c) “Keep the flag as it is without any change.” The footnotes show that 11 members backed this option.

The social media claim that Harini Amarasuriya was among the members who put forward these two options in 2016 is therefore true. However, it is a footnote in a 2016 report and not proof of current government policy.

These recommendations stem from public feedback. A public representations committee report documents the diverse views held in society. It does not record government decisions. The recommendations were options put forward by individual members, not a collective decision of the committee. Each chapter begins by analysing the varied opinions, views, and arguments that the public and organisations presented on a given theme.

The 2016 recommendations were never implemented

The government of the time failed to draft and pass a new constitution through this process, and the committee’s recommendations were never officially implemented. In September 2020, the then government appointed a separate expert committee to draft a new constitution (here). Sri Lanka still operates under the 1978 Constitution, which has been amended from time to time.

Presenting this committee report as recent, or its recommendations as due for implementation, is therefore misleading. The recommendations were formulated in 2016 on the basis of public opinion at the time, to explore the constitutional changes people wanted before a new constitution was drafted.

The Prime Minister’s Office said the recommendations are not government policy

To clarify further, we contacted the Media Secretary to Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya. After confirming with the Prime Minister, she said that Dr. Amarasuriya joined the public representations committee in 2016 as a university academic and civil society activist, and that the recommendations were based on the public feedback gathered that year.

The Prime Minister said these recommendations should not be framed as an objective of the current government or as her personal views. Her office confirmed that the government had no intention or readiness to implement such recommendations, and that they merely reflected public opinion in 2016.

Also Read: Is the government preparing to remove the lion from the national flag?

Join us to learn more about our fact-check investigations.

Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | Google News | TikTok

Conclusion:

The document behind the social media posts is the 2016 Public Representations Committee (PRC) Report on Constitutional Reform. A 20-member committee appointed by the Cabinet on December 22, 2015, compiled it, and it was completed in May 2016. Current Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya served on the committee as a university academic. The report’s footnotes confirm that she was among the members who put forward alternative recommendations for a secular state and a new flag. None of these recommendations was ever implemented.

The only constitutional change the current government made in 2026 was the 22nd Amendment, passed on September 25, which extended judges’ retirement ages. The Cabinet Spokesperson said on July 21 that the government had not yet decided to introduce a new constitution, and no proposal for a secular state or a new flag has been made.

Presenting this committee report as recent, or its contents as due for implementation, is misleading. Framing the recommendations as an objective of the current government, or as the Prime Minister’s personal views, is equally misleading. The Prime Minister’s Office confirmed that the government has no plan to implement them.