- Sri Lanka’s government has greenlit the country’s long-delayed animal welfare bill, which proposes stringent penalties for cruelty to animals and would replace a century-old animal cruelty law.
- The draft law has reignited a fierce debate over the centuries-old practice of using domesticated elephants in religious processions.
- Critics say the proposed law could effectively end elephant chaining, while animal welfare advocates argue that the bill does not explicitly prohibit chains but instead targets causing unnecessary pain, suffering and cruelty.
- With the bill now before parliament, the elephant debate is forcing Sri Lanka to confront the realities of regulating the use of an animal that occupies both a place in religious tradition and is a protected species.
KANDY, Sri Lanka – The famous Kandy Esala Perahera procession is one of Sri Lanka’s most vibrant religious-cultural celebrations, which transforms the hill capital into a spectacle of color, music, dance and caparisoned elephants to honor the tooth relic of the Buddha. But as the country prepared for this year’s Esala Perahera, which started on Aug. 18, politicians, Buddhist monks, veterinarians, lawyers and animal welfare advocates are busy debating the future of the country’s captive elephants.
At the center of the controversy is Sri Lanka’s long-awaited Animal Welfare Bill, a draft law that has spent nearly two decades in legal limbo before finally getting the green light from the government in July. Opponents to the bill argue that if it becomes law, it could effectively prohibit the chaining of elephants, making their use in religious processions difficult and threatening the continuation of centuries-old Buddhist ceremonial traditions.
Animal welfare groups counter that the bill has been misunderstood: It does not explicitly ban chains but seeks to prevent cruelty to animals and improve standards of care.
Opposition to the bill
“The animal welfare bill has a lot of ambiguities, and we fear that it could negatively restrict the use of elephants in major cultural events,” said Ashoka Dangolla, a veterinarian at the University of Peradeniya who has been involved in caring for the elephants of the Kandy Perahera for more than two decades.
Dangolla told Mongabay that although elephants are no longer used for heavy labor, their welfare can still be improved. He said owners and mahouts, elephant riders, trainers or keepers, have practical knowledge of managing domesticated elephants, which should have been considered when drafting the legislation.
“Domesticated elephant owners know the practical side of managing an elephant, so their ideas should be considered when drafting the law to achieve better results,” he said. “But that did not happen in drafting the animal welfare bill.”
Several politicians and religious leaders say the new law seeks to prohibit chaining of elephants during religious and cultural ceremonies. Captive elephants are commonly restrained during transport, veterinary treatment, overnight housing and feeding, and particularly during musth, a periodic condition in male elephants associated with elevated testosterone levels and heightened aggression. Temporary restraint is also used while elephants wait to enter crowded processions.
Experienced mahouts argue that chains remain one of the few practical tools for safely managing animals weighing several tonnes and capable of causing fatal injuries.
Prolonged confinement
Veterinarians, however, distinguish between necessary temporary restraint and prolonged confinement. Scientific studies have linked extended chaining to foot and joint problems, muscle deterioration, restricted movement and stereotypic behaviors such as repetitive swaying or head-bobbing. Long periods of restraint can also limit social interaction and other natural behaviors.
Animal welfare advocates strongly reject the suggestion that the bill would ban elephants from religious processions such as the Kandy Perahera.
“The bill does not contain a blanket prohibition on chaining elephants,” said Charuka Wickramasekara, an executive member of the Animal Welfare Coalition (AWC), who is familiar with the drafting process. “Chaining can be done as recommended by a veterinary surgeon as and when it is required. What it seeks to prevent is unnecessary suffering to the animals.”
Panchali Panapitiya, founder and executive director of the Rally for Animal Rights and Environment (RARE), has long campaigned against the ill-treatment of captive elephants and their use in religious processions. She advocates stronger welfare protections and a retirement system allowing captive elephants to spend their final years in protected, sanctuary-like environments.
“If you look at the elephants, all of them are having wounds on their legs caused by chains,” Panapitiya told Mongabay. This is animal cruelty and against Buddhist practices, so the custom of using elephants in these processions should be stopped, Panapitiya said.
Replacing an archaic law
Wickramasekara acknowledges that the bill may contain shortcomings but argues that these can be addressed through amendments. He says new legislation is essential because Sri Lanka’s current legal framework is more than a century old.
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance, enacted in 1907 during British rule, has long been criticized for being outdated and for having limited protections and penalties that do not reflect a modern understanding of animal welfare.
Efforts to replace it began in 2006, when Sri Lanka’s Law Commission initiated work on a new animal welfare bill. The proposal underwent numerous revisions and consultations involving government agencies, veterinarians, religious leaders and civil society organizations, as well as scrutiny by the Attorney General’s Department.
Yet successive governments have failed to move the draft law forward. Changes in government, shifting legislative priorities and recurring opposition from different stakeholders have contributed to the delay. Nearly two decades later, the bill has finally been received by the cabinet, published in the government gazette and presented to parliament.
What happens next?
Before the bill can take effect, it must proceed through the legislative process, which involves readings, committee consideration and a final vote. Amendments can be introduced during this process and before the bill is passed in parliament, after which a speaker’s certificate is issued and it becomes a formal law.
As such, the immediate future of this bill remains uncertain. Agriculture Minister K. D. Lalkantha, whose portfolio covers the subject, has indicated that a broader dialogue is needed before the bill proceeds to the next stage and that the government intends to hold consultations in the coming months.
Parliament therefore still has an opportunity to clarify provisions that have generated concern, including those relating to captive elephants and acceptable standards of restraint.
Beyond elephants, the proposed legislation would introduce a much broader framework for protecting animals. It would replace the century-old cruelty law with provisions covering companion, farm, wild and stray animals; introduce a legal duty of care; and broaden the definition of cruelty to include unnecessary pain, suffering, injury and distress.
The bill also proposes stronger penalties, while seeking better standards for the treatment and slaughter of farm animals and greater protection for companion and stray animals.
The intersection of conservation and animal welfare legislation is critical for Sri Lanka. Conservation law addresses the illegal capture, possession and trade of wildlife, while animal welfare law addresses the suffering caused by confinement, transport and cruel methods such as snaring or poisoning. Used together, these laws can strengthen enforcement and support additional charges and penalties in trafficking and poaching cases, experts say.
Conservation and animal welfare
“The animal welfare law can complement the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO) and help fight wildlife crime more effectively, so the intersection of conservation and animal welfare legislation is critical,” said Manori Gunawardena, a wildlife scientist and a director of the Environmental Foundation Limited (EFL).
The conservation aspect of the proposed law seeks to address the illegal capture, possession and trade of wildlife; while the animal welfare law aspect could effectively address the suffering caused by confinement, transport and acts of cruelty, such as snaring or poisoning. Used together, these laws can strengthen enforcement and support additional charges and penalties in trafficking and poaching cases, Gunawardena added.
“This animal welfare bill may not be perfect, but it is important to move this bill from bill to law status as a first step to address animal cruelty in Sri Lanka,” Gunawardena told Mongabay.
For Sri Lanka, therefore, the elephant-chain controversy is only one part of a much larger question: Whether the country can finally replace a 119-year-old animal protection law with a modern framework that safeguards animal welfare while taking into account cultural traditions and practical realities.
Banner Image: Sri Lanka uses captive elephants in cultural events such as the Kandy Esala Perahera to carry the sacred relics of the Buddha. While animal welfare groups demand humane treatment, some advocates call for ending the use of live elephants altogether, arguing that such practices amount to harassment. Image by Daniel Liabeuf via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0).
Cite this article
Malaka Rodrigo (2026). Culture, welfare and politics clash over Sri Lanka’s long-delayed animal welfare law. Mongabay Conservation news. DOI: https://doi.org/10.66709/news-327043Credits
