𝐇𝐑𝐂𝐒𝐋 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐦 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐇𝐢𝐣𝐚𝐛 𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐟𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬

The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka issued a recommendation on June 26 regarding the decision of the former Commissioner General of Examinations (1st Respondent) to withhold the Advanced Level results of around 70 candidates from Zahira College, Trincomalee in 2024 (Case No. HRC/SUO-MOTU/02/2024).

The examination results were withheld based on the allegation that the candidates, all of whom were Muslim girls, wore religious attire (a loose shawl that covered their heads) that violated an examination rule requiring them to keep their ears visible during the examination. 

The Commission initially summoned officials from the Department of Examinations to mediate a settlement. The Department had released the results of the candidates and had permitted them to apply for re-scrutiny, the Commission observed.  

The Commission thereafter completed its inquiry and found that the 1st Respondent had failed to demonstrate that the candidates had violated any examination rule, as several witnesses from the Department confirmed that the attire worn by the candidates had in fact enabled their ears to be visible. It also found that the Department had failed to hold a proper inquiry to establish any violation of any examination rule.

The Commission issued its final recommendation on the matter and found that the 1st Respondent had violated the candidates’ right to the freedom of religion guaranteed under articles 10 and 14(1)(e) of the Constitution and the rights to equality and non-discrimination guaranteed under articles 12(1) and 12(2) of the Constitution.

The Commission’s recommendation elaborated on the scope of the freedom to manifest religion or belief based on landmark decisions of the Supreme Court and the opinions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee. The Commission found that the 1st Respondent's decision amounted to an unnecessary, disproportionate, and unreasonable limitation on the candidates' freedom to manifest religion or belief.

The Commission also issued the following key recommendations:

1.         Conduct a full and impartial inquiry into how and why a recommendation was made by an external official that the aforesaid candidates had violated the examination rule contained in clause 17(IV) of the ‘Rules and Instructions for Examination Candidates’ published in the Gazette Notification No. 2,137 of 16 August 2019. Necessary disciplinary action should be taken against any such official if it is established that such official had misrepresented facts to the Department of Examinations or had acted in bad faith.

2.         Issue clear guidelines in the form of a circular clarifying that the examination rule contained in clause 17(IV) of the ‘Rules and Instructions for Examination Candidates’ published in the Gazette Notification No. 2,137 of 16 August 2019 should not be interpreted and applied to prevent any student from manifesting their religion or belief. Examination invigilators and supervisors should be given clear instructions that religious attire adapted to comply with any requirement to keep a candidate’s ears visible, such as the wearing of a loose shawl, should, according to the manner and form of such attire, be considered satisfactory.

3.         Review the current procedure for assignment of female invigilators, including Tamil-speaking female invigilators, and ensure the assignment of adequate numbers of female invigilators, including Tamil-speaking female invigilators, to examination centers in the future.