Vetted by NeuralPress's Multi-Agent Verifier for strict factual validity and event relevance. Our compliance engine cross-checks and filters search results to ensure zero false correlations or misleading content.
Primary Sources
CEJ calls for Environmental Levy on shopping bags - Newswire
May 16, 2026 at 10:58 AM The Centre for Environmental Justice (CEJ) has urged the Supreme Court to ensure that charges currently imposed on shopping bags are directed to the government’s Environmental Conservation Levy Fund, rather than private accounts. The case, taken up on Friday (15), stems from concerns over the widespread use of shopping bags and single‑use plastics such as polythene, which contribute heavily to environmental pollution. In 2020, following a petition by CEJ, the Supreme Court ordered a complete ban on the free distribution of shopping bags. The Court also directed that if bags are provided, a price must be set according to their size. As a result, the current system charges Rs. 3.00 and Rs. 5.00 per bag. However, CEJ argued that under the Environmental Conservation Levy Act, such charges must be credited to the government’s levy fund. At present, private shop owners and supermarkets are pocketing the money, meaning no funds are collected for conservation. CEJ told the Court this practice violates existing law and infringes on the fundamental rights of the public. The case was heard before Supreme Court Justices Preethi Padman Surasena, Achala Wengappuli, and Sampath Wijeratne, who scheduled the next hearing for November 3, 2026. At the hearing, CEJ requested that while charges should remain in place, “the money should not go into private accounts. Instead, it must be credited to the government’s Environmental Conservation Levy Fund established by law.” The organization asked the Court to order a mechanism ensuring funds are remitted to the state. Respondents named in the case include Finance Minister (President) Anura Kumara Dissanayake, the Minister of Environment, the Central Environmental Authority, and the Consumer Affairs Authority. Senior Counsel Dr. Ravindranath Dabare and Counsel Sawanthi Ponnamperuma appeared for the petitioners, under the guidance of Attorney‑at‑Law Nilmali Wickramasinghe. (Newswire) 2026-05-16
Sri Lanka's new waste law could make consumers pay for corporate pollution
Proposed amendments to Sri Lanka's National Environmental Act could shift the burden of waste management from corporations to consumers, the Centre for Environmental Justice (CEJ) warned. Issuing a statement, CEJ chairperson Hemantha Withanage said the amendments, gazetted on 22 April 2026, appeared to convert the globally recognised principle of Extended Producer Responsibility into a mechanism that also held consumers liable and described the move as dangerous and contrary to international norms. Extended Producer Responsibility, or EPR, is a policy tool that places responsibility on producers for the environmental impact of their products throughout their lifecycle, including after consumers have used them. Withanage said the proposed Sri Lankan amendments appeared to undermine this principle by including consumers in the legal framework alongside importers, manufacturers, vendors and handlers under the proposed Section 23QQ of the amendment bill. He also alleged that the Ministry of Environment and the Central Environmental Authority had drafted the amendments behind closed doors, without adequate consultation with environmental civil society organisations. He said that although the CEA had initially involved civil society groups in discussions, subsequent meetings had been held without them — and that officials had even claimed a later draft had removed the word "consumer" from the EPR provisions, a claim he said the gazetted version contradicted. Withanage highlighted India's 2021 EPR regulations as a model Sri Lanka had failed to follow. He said Indian law explicitly placed responsibility on producers, importers and brand owners for plastic packaging waste and clearly excluded consumers from producer obligations. He also cited OECD guidelines and the Basel Convention, arguing that all stakeholders, including waste pickers, should be formally involved in EPR implementation, and that Sri Lanka's process had ignored these principles. Withanage alleged that powerful corporate interests were driving the amendments to avoid future waste management costs running into billions of rupees, warning that if responsibility was shifted to consumers, the public would ultimately be made to pay for waste generated by corporations. He said similar tactics had already been seen in the legal arrangements surrounding the plastic bag levy. He called on the public to contact their elected representatives before the bill was enacted, describing the proposed changes as sub...
Industry-backed EPR Amendments could shift waste burden to public ...
The proposed amendments to Sri Lanka's National Environmental Act (NEA) could dangerously dilute the principle of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and unfairly transfer the burden of waste management from corporations to consumers, Chairman of the Centre for Environmental Justice (CEJ) Hemantha Withanage has warned. Withanage, in a strongly worded statement issued yesterday, alleged ...
tvChix - Free Contacts & Dating for Transgender, Transvestite ...
tvChix is the fastest growing site for crossdressers, tgirls, and others in the transgendered community, including admirers and friends
