மத தூண்டுதல் செயல்பாடுReligious-Incitement Function (RIF)
ICCPR Act §3 enforcement-gap audit between documented majoritarian incitement events and prosecutions reaching verdict.
RIF(t) = (documented majoritarian-incitement events with no ICCPR Act §3 prosecution at time t) / (total ICCPR Act §3 prosecutions at time t)
§1What it measures
RIF formalises the enforcement-gap claim that sits beneath the Aluthgama → Digana → Easter → forced-cremation sequence. The denominator is total ICCPR Act §3 prosecutions; the numerator is documented majoritarian-incitement events (per ICG, OHCHR, Verité, HRCSL, Hashtag Generation) that did not produce a §3 charge against named instigators.
Asymmetry between numerator and denominator is the auditable structural finding. RIF is descriptive, not predictive — it measures the documented gap, not a forecast.
§2Inputs & sources
Events recorded in the named civil-society and UN sources as meeting the ICCPR Art 20(2) threshold (advocacy of religious hatred constituting incitement) directed at Muslim, Christian, Tamil-Hindu or Hill-Country-Tamil targets, where no ICCPR Act §3 charge against named instigators followed.
- ◇ICG Asia Report N°291 — Sri Lanka's Muslims: Caught in the Crossfire
- ◇OHCHR A/HRC/43/48/Add.2 (Shaheed, 2020)
- ◇Verité Research — Fading Beliefs (2018)
- ◇Hashtag Generation hate-speech monitoring
- ◇Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka recommendations
All prosecutions filed under §3 of the ICCPR Act No. 56 of 2007 in the relevant period, with target community recorded. Public registry maintained by HRCSL, CPA and Article 19 briefings.
- ◇ICCPR Act No. 56 of 2007 — Parliament of Sri Lanka
- ◇Centre for Policy Alternatives — ICCPR Act monitoring
- ◇Article 19 — Sri Lanka briefings
§3Worked reading
The qualitative pattern documented across all named sources is asymmetric: §3 prosecutions are overwhelmingly directed against Muslim, Christian and Tamil individuals for posts/statements deemed to 'insult Buddhism', while documented majoritarian-incitement events have rarely produced §3 charges against named instigators. RIF formalises this as a ratio.
TLTE never publishes its own count. The model is a publication device for the existing civil-society registries — anyone can compute RIF from the same sources.
If the Sri Lankan state initiates and completes ICCPR Act §3 prosecutions against named instigators of documented majoritarian-incitement events on a scale comparable to its minority-directed prosecutions, RIF moves toward parity and the enforcement-gap branch of the religion-state argument is rebutted.