This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001280 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR SA, SA/INS, DRL, DRL/IRF 
NSC FOR E.MILLARD 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/03/2014 
TAGS: PREL PHUM KIRF CE
SUBJECT: IN MEETINGS, PDAS CAMP HEARS POLITICALLY 
WIDESPREAD OPPOSITION TO ANTI-CONVERSION BILLS 
 
REF: COLOMBO 1244 AND PREVIOUS 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Jeffrey J. Lunstead.  Reasons 1.5(b,d). 
 
¶1.  (C) SUMMARY:  During July 30-31 meetings, PDAS Donald 
Camp expressed the USG's concern for religious freedom in Sri 
Lanka to government officials and political interlocutors. 
Prime Minister Rajapakse stated that the government was 
pursuing its own anti-conversion bill to thwart the 
anti-conversion bill presented by the JHU party of Buddhist 
monks.  The GSL planned to use all tactics in its power to 
keep the JHU bill from reaching Parliament for debate and 
vote.  Opposition Leader Wickremesinghe also stated that he 
did not support either bill.  Both political leaders said 
that party members would be allowed to vote their conscience 
if either bill came to a vote.  The JHU maintained that its 
bill only intends to prevent "forcible" conversions and was 
aimed at protecting, not prohibiting human rights.  It is not 
a foregone conclusion that these bills will be passed or even 
reach the floor for a vote.  Mission remains engaged with the 
GSL on the negative ramifications of such a potential law. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  (C) During July 30-31 meetings in Colombo, State 
Department PDAS for South Asia Donald Camp raised the issue 
of religious freedom in Sri Lanka with many interlocutors. 
Camp specifically queried government officials and opposition 
politicians about the recent developments with religious 
anti-conversion bills.  (Note:  The non-GSL political party 
of Buddhist monks, Jathika Hela Urumaya "JHU," has presented 
one anti-conversion bill to Parliament while the government 
has begun the process of drafting its own anti-conversion 
bill.)  In all forums, both Camp and Ambassador Lunstead 
underscored that anti-conversion legislation would be a step 
backward for religious freedom in Sri Lanka.  They urged the 
government to consider positive steps, such as a mutually 
agreed voluntary code of behavior, to address the issue 
before it became a problem in the United States' bilateral 
relationship with Sri Lanka. 
 
Prime Minister negative on bills 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  (C) Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapakse offered insight into 
the government's intentions regarding anti-conversion 
legislation.  Rajapakse described the government bill as a 
temporary measure to counter the one presented by the JHU. 
Further, the government intended to bring motions and other 
procedural actions to keep the JHU bill from being debated in 
Parliament.  Rajapakse admitted his fear that the JHU bill 
could pass if it reached Parliament for a vote.  Given the 
recent challenges filed against the JHU bill, the PM said he 
did not know how the Supreme Court would rule, but added a 
negative ruling could effectively end the effort. 
 
¶4.  (C) Regarding the government's own bill, the PM said he 
instructed Buddhist Affairs Minister Wickremenayake to 
discuss the issue with other religious leaders to develop a 
balanced bill.  Rajapakse also acknowledged that many 
Buddhist groups, including leading clergy, were against an 
anti-conversion bill.  (Note:  Rajapakse was remarkably 
candid in discussing his party's delaying tactics.  His 
confidence needs to be strictly protected.) 
 
Opposition not supportive 
------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (C) During a later meeting with Camp, United National 
Party (UNP) head and Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe 
expressed his condemnation of anti-conversion legislation. 
Wickremesinghe thought of two possible ways the GSL could 
obstruct a potential vote on an anti-conversion bill.  The 
government could pressure the Supreme Court to throw out the 
bill or assign the bill to a parliamentary standing 
committee, letting it linger there without further debate or 
action. 
 
¶6.  (C) Separately, the Ambassador spoke on August 1 with UNP 
MP (and former UNP peace process negotiator) G.L. Peiris 
about Sri Lanka's anti-conversion debate.  Peiris said that 
in a July 31 meeting, the Chief Incumbent of the Asgiriya 
Sect -- one of the leading sects of Buddhism in Sri Lanka and 
a respected voice on social issue -- spoke of his opposition 
to an anti-conversion bill.  (Note:  The leading Buddhist 
clergy of the Malwatte Temple, the other main sect, has also 
expressed disapproval of such legislation.)  Similar to other 
interlocutors' comments, Peiris also confirmed that the JHU 
bill could be sent to a parliamentary select committee, where 
it could theoretically languish, without ever reaching the 
floor for a vote. 
 
Vote on Conscience 
------------------ 
¶7.  (C) Both the PM and Wickremesinghe stated that party 
members would likely be allowed to vote their conscience on 
the issue if any bill on religious anti-conversion reached 
the floor for a vote. 
 
JHU out to protect human rights 
------------------------------- 
 
¶8.  (C) During their discussion with PDAS Camp, three MP 
monks from the JHU explained their support for an 
anti-conversion bill.  The JHU was against "forcible" 
conversions, they stated through a translator.  They were not 
against other religions and supported conversions in general, 
as monks often go abroad to convert people to Buddhism. 
Describing being "paid to convert" as an insult to all 
religions, the monk MPs said that such conversions impinged 
on people's religious freedom.  The party members urged the 
USG to study the bill carefully, as its purpose was only to 
protect human rights, not violate them.  It was "others" who 
had spread an inaccurate picture of the JHU's intentions with 
the anti-conversion bill.  In return, PDAS Camp urged them to 
consult closely with other religious groups on this issue. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶9.  (C) Given all the noise and public discussion on this 
issue, we would like to underscore that the passage of an 
anti-conversion bill -- or even a vote on a draft bill -- is 
not a foregone conclusion.  Many throughout the government 
and political and civil arenas are trying to stop this 
legislation.  It is a divisive and intensely personal issue 
and it appears that few would be willing to sacrifice 
individual beliefs simply for political expediency.  In light 
of the earnest efforts by leading Sri Lankans to take a stand 
against this legislation, for maximum effectiveness, the USG 
role in this issue should be to tread lightly.  We will 
continue our quiet, behind-the-scenes work to remind Sri 
Lankans, especially government officials, that such a law 
would seriously harm religious freedom and serve to 
exacerbate ethnic tensions.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶10.  (U) PDAS Donald Camp cleared this message. 
 
LUNSTEAD