because it radicalization they are thinking about banning the burqa will the new rule stop this so-called islamic extremism . ♪ peter: hello and welcome to the program. many in sri lankan's muslim community say they are being targeted. the government is reintroducing a ban on burqas. it says the full face covering is a sign of religious extremism.

more than 1000 muslim schools will also be shut. the move comes after two years of a series of attacks on easter sunday. 250 were killed. >> it affects our national security directly. in our early days muslim women and girls never wore the burqa. it is a sign of religious extremism that came about recently. nobody can open a school and teach whatever you want to the children. all children's must study in accordance with the national education policy. >> victims of covid-19 should ever be created a practice

prohibited by muslims. the ban was lifted after months of protest. separately controversial anti-terror law to deal with this violence. . the report from colombo. >> the government's latest move is being reacted to with concern among the muslim community. this does not affect all muslim women in sri lanka, but the community does feel that this is sort of another way of discrimination by the government. now the government for its part says this is to ensure national security, and that this new rule is needed. but obviously from what we have seen in the recent past, in terms of policy and treatment of

the muslim community, there is concern. especially when you bring in a new rule. that essentially allows for a person to be held up to 12 years for what the government is calling rehabilitation. these are reasons that people are beginning to question the sort of timing of this. we just got out of one controversy where the government for a long. of time did not allow the burial of covid-19 victims. in this directly affected the muslim and catholic communities. the muslim community had a lot of issues with this. and finally coincidentally the government conceded and allowed the burial of covid-19 victims.

so while giving them their burial rights it seems to be there taking their rights away to where the burqa. >> before we talk to our guests, a quick word of housekeeping. we have tried all day to get representation from the sri lankan government but as of now no one was available to talk to us. they are rauff hakeem a former minister of genesis. shreen abdul saroor peace activists and jehan perera executive director of national peace council. welcome to you all. as a former minister of justice,

this is being done on national security grounds what does that mean? rauff: this is certainly an overreaction to an issue which has been unnecessarily brought into stigmatize the muslim community. this is only worn by a small gang which unfortunately have been the leaders of the attacks. the conclusion of the war brought about a sense of transcendentalism among the majority. to make the muslims the next enemy so that they can keep the

mobilization of the singular majority in their favor. and this is nothing but a way to try and demonize and stigmatize this community. which is now getting marginalized day by day. and this is one such example. peter: part of the narrative. seems to come down on the stance from the government. muslim women used to never wear the burqa anyway so what if we insist it is to be banned? shreen: to begin with there is no clear-cut decision on what they are trying to ban. some people saying it is the

burqa or various forms of face covering. so the issue with the community here is that 1% of the muslim when -- women still where the burqa. under emergency regulation they brought a face covering ban but there was even a move to remove the he job -- hijab. everyone is wearing a and covering the face, there is no identification whatsoever right now and why is it all about muslim men and women's attire being connected to extremism. they are being demonized like

rauff hakeem said. >> shreen abdul saroor raises a very valid point. it would be nice if someone from the government was here but they have declined our invitation. are they simply going into a gray area? because it seems to me that most people outside of the muslim world, indeed most people even in the broader muslim world know the difference between the jib -- and the burqa anyway. jehan: i think that is the reason why the government representatives do not want to come. because what is on the table now is a proposal signed by one minister. the minister of national security. and it hasn't not yet been accepted by the cabinet.

i think the government is aware that this is a very controversial and that they have not come to a conclusion at all. that their decision is not to ban the burqa, and also to close down 1000 muslim schools. on the grounds that they are anti-regulated and have not registered with the ministry. they can supervise them but i do not think that they should be closing them. as mr. rauff hakeem said and shreen abdul saroor this is an issue of nationalism here. this is a government that was elected on the basis of a majority national vote as well as the desire to protect national security. this government was elected in the aftermath of the easter

bombing. the this group of muslims that spawn ts action were very educated young people. educated abroad and had no organic links to sri lanka. so you cannot blame the muslim community for that. but that is the injustice of all that this is happened. traditionally the sri lankan muslims have been a very peaceful community. they were victims in the 30 year war before. so even prior to that there was no real history of the muslims being terrorists or being violent. after this easter attack there has been no incident of muslim aggression, so it is very unfair that the government should be

targeting the muslims this way. peter: again rauff hakeem coming back to you as a former minister of justice. if we could ask the government, and we are heading towards the two-year anniversary of the easter attacks. there will be more tension probably in the air, i guess the government might admit that we had to make the entire country feel safe. that was why we brought the band in. but how does it make the country, even the majority buddhist population feel safer now? if they introduce this been going forward. rauff: the government tries to continue on pretentious propaganda through the media organization and private media.

to control through fear psychosis, this is a strategy employed throughout. and now the we can see that there is a clear overreach by the commission planning into such controversial topics such as black -- banning this or the other. it was a very very planned media strategy by the government and this is what is very unfortunate. but they do not realize the so called heinous crime appears to be a cult. which is the making of certain

intelligence operations to demonize the muslims. in fact take the muslims against the catholics. we have no animosity against any religious communities so much more so than the catholics themselves. and that is perhaps the reason why such a reason was brought and designed. >> i would like to get into the political maneuvering surrounding this a couple of minutes. shreen abdul saroor on its website they are talking about how this is a racist agenda. however if we look around the world, french, belgian, and austria these countries have acted this kind of legislation.

the italian government had a drafted but did not follow through on it. in europe it feels like it is a much more nuanced debate that everyone gets a chance to engage with. and the governments of today act accordingly. with that supposition on my part is right makes the sri lankan government not prepared to do the same thing? shreen: as i pointed out earlier we have been trying to look at what has been going on in the community. so the sri lankan government should have concentration on muslim women because it is often times men who define our dress code. we do not want our muslim men to tell us what she -- what we should wear. is about our dignity, and our body.

so in that context the sri lankan government should have that kind of representation with women. they need to have their consent and really have a psychological feeling of removing something you have been wearing since your teenage age. for you to remove it it is like fermenters be like their naked. that is the concept that they have it is not just of modesty and that conversation never happened. that example is from other countries, we are a pluralistic country. our constitution talks about multi-diversity and multi-community. we have article 10 which talks about religious freedom and article two talks about equality before law. so all those things regarded the

sri lankan failed -- the shrunken government has failed to community. they gave us our burial rights to go and they took it away from us using covid. now the burqa will be taken away. what is the government doing? by taking away rights? they are all men, so in that context why are they demonizing the women? this is the question we all have. >> the sri lankan government is also reportedly closing down up to 1000 muslim schools. presumably that decision-making process came after a. of scrutiny. where government expectoration

-- inspectors were going into the schools and saying you are in breach of national education policy. do you know if schools were subjected to similar scrutiny? jehan: i know we have not heard that. and of course the justification for that would be that the christians are not the superior threat. while muslims are because of what happened on easter sunday. but i do not think that is fair at all. they should just come out and say what they are actually finding if they are finding something that is being taught at the muslim schools. they must come out until about. and most of them are registered with the government. the ones that are not yet registered should be asked to register. >> rauff hakeem let's go back to the political diamond -- dynamic

you were talking about earlier. they are writing a wave of identifying a minority and implicitly pointing a finger of suspicion at that minority even though that minority may have done nothing wrong. that is a journal of record, a matter of journalistic fact. because the president two years ago talked about the burqa as being the burqa -- the flag of fundamentalism. that is very loaded terminology. rauff: yes indeed, this has been the narrative that they have kept all throughout in order to mobilize the singular majority. they are playing such cheap politics and that is what is

apparent. when you talk about the schools they are -- they have yet to produce strong evidence. there are doctrines that are polluting -- they say there are the lock turns polluting the climate education systems in the country, but they are yet to produce strong evidence from the curricula eyes cells that are being taught. i categorically deny that there is no such devious and dangerous content in the curriculum of these schools.

it is an age old system that is been practiced over a large. of time. muslim schools on the pretext but the community itself is quite capable of self-regulating their own religious inspections of schools. which we have been doing. after the sunday text we have taken it upon ourselves within the community and we are doing that. so just leave that to self-regulation. >> jehan perera when it comes to the public opinion how did the buddhists feel across the country? because it feels as if we are talking about a government that

wants to shunt a country towards being in different and intimidated by the minority. instead of saying we are basically a secular society and we can, and we should all live in peace. particular after what shreen abdul saroor was telling us a couple minutes ago. jehan: the sri lankan majority there is an insecurity there coming from the history. of colonialism 500 years ago and then would have more recently in the past where india supported the international conflict. so it is ultimately single ease feel insecure and it did that,

it made them very insecure. isengalese thinking the muslims a real threat that i noticed that with the burqa been -- ban, that people are saying this is to diver our attention from another problem. we have economic problems and we are very desperately asking china for loans. there is covid that is also very bed but the economy is really bad. and there is a huge corruption scam, i think some people are saying this is to distract attention and also elections are coming.

>> in the last minute of the program, to you shreen abdul saroor. if there is to be a push for positive dialogue, a constructive dialogue either surrounding this specific case that we are talking today, the burqa. or just minority rights in the country, who is going to drive that? and who -- where is that going to come from? is there anyone in the political world of sri lanka who is prepared to send this message saying let's just get on with each other? shreen: we will have a very tough time. this particular regime has openly said that it is a singular country and he is the president for buddhists on an independent day. so he is already alienated the

minorities in the country. if you. -- carefully look at the sri lankan government going to this various human rights mechanism regarding cremation they only listen to the international community. so the international community is the only way forward. there are lots of muslim countries as members and then we look forward to that resolution to be passed, because that resolution and operation of paragraph seven and eight talk about minority communities and their rights. because of sri lankan really wanted reconciliation and peace they wouldn't ostracize minorities like this. i do not think there is a way forward with this form of dialogue.

>> thank you to our guests as ever on inside story. our guests were rauff hakeem, shreen abdul saroor, and jehan perera. we did asked somebody to us for this contentious debate but no one was available to talk to us today. you can talk to us via facebook, facebook. from me peter dobbie thanks for watching we will see you very soon.

♪♪♪ lisa millar: for years, it's been an open secret. vincent doyle: as long as you have priests, you will have children of catholic priests. lisa: catholic priests who've broken their vow of celibacy to become fathers. michael patrick: i knew he was a priest when i was a child, but i couldn't tell them that i knew becauset was a big secret. lisa: we talk to the children who've been pressured to stay quiet and suffered in silence. sarah thomas: this is just the tip of the iceberg, what we know at the moment. i think priests' childreas a group want to be acknowledged. they want to be on the map. they exist. they're not collateral damage. lisa: some are speaking out for the very first time. linda lawless: and i can just remember rocking, going,