Home Sri Lankan Cases A Bill to incorporate the New Wine Harvest Ministries

Supreme Court
Sarath N Silva CJ, H.S Yapa J, T.B. Weerasuriya J,
Key words
Article 14 (1)(g); Article 10
Cases referred to

SC Determination 2 of 2001

Manohara de Silva, W.D. Weeraratne, Bandara Talgune

M.A. Sumanthiran, Viran Corea

P.A. Rathnayake DSG, Arjuna Obeysekara SC

Counsel who appeared
Date of Decision
Judgement by Name of Judge/s
Noteworthy information relating to the case
Other information

A Bill to incorporate the New Wine Harvest Ministries

S.C. Special Determination No. 2/2003

Facts of the case

The petitioner’s alleged that the objective of the body sought to be incorporated although seemingly religious in nature transcends gospel meetings, Bible studies and making know the message and teachings of Jesus Christ to a socio-economic dimension encompassing persons of other religions, faiths or beliefs.They submitted that the body would not only provide for the manifestation of a religion or belief or faith in the exercise of a the fundamental right guaranteed by article 14 (1) (g) …but also engage in economic activity that will assist in the spread and promotion of the faith. The petitioner’s further argued that the economic dimensions of the objects would be strengthened by the powers that are vested in the body which would enhance the financial capacity of the corporation to induce and allure persons of other religions and convert them to the faith that is sought to be spread.

Findings related to FoRB


(1) ‘The process of uplifting the socio-economic conditions of the people of Sri Lanka, not restricted to persons who are of the same religious belief or faith as that of the body sought to be incorporated, would necessarily result in an inconsistency with the free exercise of a persons thought, conscience and religion as postulated in article 10.’


 (2) ‘the allurement which would result in the process of uplifting socioeconomic conditions would distort the freedom which every person should have to observe a religion on behalf of his choice as guaranteed by Article 10.’