news
Embarking on a digital journey: Exploring Sri Lanka’s readiness
The new normal requires new approaches and solutions, an imperative change that must be embraced by all sections of the economy to survive and to stay relevant.
The outbreak of the pandemic saw the country grappling to keep up with day-to- day activities, both on a personal and corporate level. One of the key challenges observed was in the areas of transacting for goods and services in what can be called an increasingly contactless word.
Although relevant authorities have pushed for Sri Lanka to move towards a cashless economy, it was during the initial outbreak of COVID-19 that people actively looked to use the digital payment infrastructure that is in place.
Across the world, including Sri Lanka, the digital modes of communications including payments are continuing to boom, thanks to the introduction of new technologies coupled with other developments to encourage the emergence of innovative ways of doing things, which leads to the creation of new business opportunities.
The Information Communications Technology Agency (ICTA) has been in the forefront in driving the adoption of digital technologies and legal frameworks in the country especially within the government.
However, despite efforts to deploy platforms and technologies by many stakeholders, the uptake has been slow largely due to the lack of awareness.
Sri Lanka’s readiness to embrace the digital journey
Even before the crisis hit, Sri Lanka had all the necessary framework to embark on the digital journey, and the ability of consumers to make an immediate transition from manual to electronic transactions provide clear evidence that a strong foundation has already been laid.
In order to enable this transition from a policy perspective, Director/Legal Advisor at ICTA & Director, Sri Lanka CERT, Mr. Jayantha Fernando affirmed that Sri Lanka has the enabling legal framework to transform every form of physical activity that is carried out, into the digital medium, except for certain classes of instruments where notarization is needed.
“I believe and can firmly say that we have sufficient legal grounds to embrace this transition,” Fernando assured.
Digital signatures
Making the digital journey even more convenient to embark on is the ability to use digital signatures. Digital signatures essentially work by proving that a digital message or document was not modified, intentionally or unintentionally, from the time it was signed. This is done by generating a unique hash of the message or document and encrypting it using the sender’s private key. In addition, the sender is bound to the communication if a digital signature is affixed, thus, providing non-repudiation.
In this context, Sri Lanka has been successful in terms of cross border transactions as well, since the root key from the island nation is recognized globally from the beginning of this year, after its launch on 14th February 2020.
In the first phase, digital certificates were provided to banks for use in financial transaction clearing systems, such as SLIPS and CITS.
During the second phase of development in 2011, digital certificates were provided to all sectors including their enterprise applications; SSL certificates and end-user certificates on both private and public networks. LankaSign provided an affordable option to Sri Lanka’s financial as well as other sectors and allowed them to automate documentation work, which was previously done manually.
With regards to verifying the validity of digital signatures, what is required is a valid certificate from the signatory, and the complete issuer chain of certificates up to the root certificate. In addition, the signatory’s public key, issuer Certificate Status Protocol (CSP) certificates and their Certificate Revocation List (CRL) are also required.
A seamless Work from Home (WFH) arrangement: Is SL capitalizing enough?
While most enterprises have been focusing on their digital transformation over the last few years, many are still utilizing processes that have manual, physical, or face-to-face components and document signing is probably the best example of this.
According to Fernando, digital signatures actually help in the current context since there is reluctance at the moment to work on premise due to the outbreak of the pandemic.
“The digital signatures are the electronic equivalent of hand-written signatures. A digital certificate issued from a trusted party would have a higher degree of validity attached to them, which ensures integrity to the transactions. What should be ideally done is for governments, Corporates and SMEs to consider the option of using digitally signed documents, so that they can communicate those in electronic form to all participants in a transaction,” he said.
However, due to lack of awareness, most private organizations are somewhat reluctant to use digital certificates or digital signatures for their day-to-day transactions, he said.
Fernando stressed that companies should embrace digital signatures as they are convenient, versatile, legally binding, secure and adaptable.
The choice of digital signatures
This again is a business choice. Customers opting for digital signatures under the Electronic Transaction Act have a number of options across various categories.
“In law, we have left it to the trading parties to decide the category of electronic signatures they would like to use. One important feature of the Act is that we have kept the law technology neutral so that it can adapt to developments in technology,” Fernando, further said.
He added that under the law, it is said that any method that helps to identify a person and to indicate that person’s intention in relation to an electronic communication would fall within the framework of an electronic signature and depending on the type of transaction, the parties can use various methods.
“So basically, customers and businesses have choices, they must pick what is suitable to them. My suggestion is to make that choice wisely and use a method that is secure, ensures integrity to the transactions and guarantees digital transactions are not tampered with. Digital signatures achieve this objectives and there are no legal barriers to use them”, he said.
Fernando outlined that Sri Lanka has been examining this area and plans are afoot to fast track the Data Protection Bill. He Chairs the drafting committee responsible for this area, and drafted the Legislation that went through a public consultation process, which has received policy level approval.
Given the recent developments in the country and the world since the emergence of an unforeseen crisis, the Data Protection bill is being further refined and amended, Fernando stressed.
The bill will be finalized in the next few months and the new Ministry of Technology, established on 20th November 2020 is given the mandate to fast track the initiative and set up the institutional framework for its implementation.
Author
- News Advertiesment
See Kapruka’s top selling online shopping categories such as Toys, Grocery, Flowers, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Clothing and Electronics. Also see Kapruka’s unique online services such as Money Remittence,News, Courier/Delivery, Food Delivery and over 700 top brands. Also get products from Amazon & Ebay via Kapruka Gloabal Shop into Sri Lanka.
Author
-
sdfsdf sdf sf sf sdf sf sdf
Author
PCoI on Easter Sunday attacks:
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC is not bound by recommendations made by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, or presidential directives in that regard, according to authoritative sources.
They said that the AG couldn’t under any circumstances initiate legal proceedings until he had received the full PCoI report.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa received the PCoI report on Feb 1. The President’s Office delivered a set of PCoI reports to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena on Feb 23, a day after the report was presented to the cabinet of ministers. The Island raised the matter with relevant authorities in the wake of a section of the media reporting the PCoI recommending punitive measures against former President Maithripala Sirisena, Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, IGP Pujitha Jayasundera, Chief of State Intelligence Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena, Chief of National Intelligence retired DIG Sisira Mendis and All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader and Samagi Jana Balavegaya MP Rishad Bathiudeen et al over the Easter Sunday carnage.
Sources pointed out that due to the inordinate delay in sharing the PCoI report with the AG, the department hadn’t been able to take preliminary measures required to initiate the proceedings. Sources said that a team of officers would take at least six weeks or more to examine the report before tangible measures could be taken.
With the AG scheduled to retire on May 24, 2021, even if the AG Department received the P CoI it would be quite a tough task to initiate proceedings ahead of retirement, sources said. However, in terms of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in last October, both the AG and the IGP could receive extensions beyond 60 at the President’s discretion.
Dappula de Livera received an Acting appointment as the AG a week after the Easter Sunday carnage whereas his predecessor Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, was elevated to Chief Justice.
Responding to another query, sources said that the Attorney General two weeks ago requested Secretary to the President for a copy of the P CoI. However, the AG was yet to receive one, sources said. In spite of the AG not receiving a P CoI copy, the AG had instructed the IGP to obtain a copy of the report when he requested the police to complete investigations into the Easter Sunday carnage. The AG issued specific instructions after having examined police files pertaining to the investigations.
The IGP, too, hadn’t received a copy so far though some sections of the report were in the public domain.
Agriculture Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage displayed at a live political programme on Derana a copy of the P CoI report he received at the cabinet meeting earlier in the day.
Sources said that the Attorney General’s Department couldn’t decide on a course of action in respect of the Easter carnage on the basis of a section of the report. In terms of the Commission of Inquiry Act (Section 24), the AG enjoyed significant powers/authority in respect of investigations; sources said adding that the Department urgently required both the P CoI report and police investigations report. The Attorney General’s Department has raised the delay in receiving a P CoI report amidst the Catholic Church attacking the government over the same issue.
Sources said that ministerial committee appointed to study the P CoI report couldn’t decide on how to proceed with the recommendations and the matter was entirely in the hands of the AG. Sources pointed out that the delay on the part of the government to release the report had received the attention of sections of the international media, including the New York Times. Public Security Minister retired Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera having met Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith at the Bishop’s House on Dec 8, 2020 said that the AG would get a copy of the P CoI report once the President received it. Minister Weerasekera said that the CID had handed over the relevant files after having completed investigations into eight blasts. Referring to the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) report on the Easter Sunday carnage, the former Navy Chief of Staff said that all such documents would have to be brought to one place and considered before initiating legal proceedings. Acknowledging that there could be delays, lawmaker Weerasekera said that on the instructions of the Attorney General a 12-member team of lawyers was working on the case. The minister vowed to expose the mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks. Investigations continued while some of those wanted were overseas, the minister said.
The minister acknowledged that the Attorney General couldn’t proceed without the P CoI report. Minister Weerasekera reiterated that once the President received the P CoI report, it would be sent to the Attorney General. The minister said that there were documents two to three feet high that needed scrutiny. The minister assured comprehensive investigation. The minister said that investigations pertaining to eight blasts had been completed and the reports handed over to the AG. However, the Attorney General had found shortcomings in those investigations.
Author
By Saman Indrajith
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on the Easter Sunday bombings had failed to identify the mastermind of , the JVP said yesterday.
Addressing the media at the party headquarters in Pelawatte, JVP Propaganda Secretary MP Vijitha Herath said that the PCoI report had levelled accusations against former President Maithripala Sirisena, former IGP and head of intelligence for their dereliction of duty, shirking of responsibilities and not taking action to prevent the attacks and negligence. There were reference to the causes of the terror attacks and actions to be taken to avoid such attacks and the influence of extremist organisations. “However, there is no mention of the mastermind of the attacks, the handlers of the attackers and those whose interests the carnage served. It is also not mentioned whether there has been any foreign or local organisation behind those attacks. As per the PCoI report the attack took place as a result of culmination of extremism.
“According to the PCoI the extremist activities were a result of the prevailing political situation then. The entire nation was waiting to see who was responsible and who masterminded those attacks. The PCoI has failed to identify the true culprits responsible for the terror attacks. The report says that the leader of the suicide cadres killed himself in the attacks and it was a puzzle. That means those who are actually responsible for the attacks are still at large. The report does not provide exact details of the sources of the attacks. The PCoI had sittings for one year and five months. It summoned various persons and got their statements but it has failed to shed any light on the terror attacks. Everybody knows that the top leaders of the government and heads of security and intelligence establishments failed in their duties. Ranil Wickremesinghe was the second in command and he too is bound by the responsibility but the PCoI report fails to identify him as one of the persons against whom legal action should be instituted. The PCoI has treated Wickremesinghe and former President Maithripala Sirisena differently. We are not telling that this report is a total failure but we cannot accept this as a complete report. The PCoI handed over its report to the President on Feb 1. After 23 days it was sent to Parliament. Now, a copy of the report is there in the parliamentary library for the perusal of MPs.”
Herath said that the PCoI did not have powers to take punitive action. “It only has powers to name those responsible and recommend action to be taken against those named.
