HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION OF SRI LANKA, Annual Report 2019 existing in the area for decades. As a temporary measure the education authorities of the complainants had been transferred to a different school. In response, the Principle of the school states that this school was established in 1923 by a Hindu philanthropist and was administered according to Hindu practices and cultural observances, while also including those of other religious denominations even after being taken over by the government. It was the contention of the respondents that they have been maintaining Hindu culture for more than 95 years and that there is an unwritten dress code that women teachers should wear "saree". It was also pointed out that although teachers of all religious denominations have worn saree in past they have never forced any teacher to follow Hindu practices. They state that teachers are allowed to wear saree in a way in which they can express their individual religious or ethnic identities. It was also contended that the said teachers had worn saree before and that the ‘Abaya’ itself was a novel introduction to Sri Lanka. The Commission found the violation of articles 10, 12 (1), 12(2) and 14 (e) of the Constitution in respect of the complainants. It held that regardless of the history of the school, it is currently a national school that receives funds from the state and is hence bound by all state rules and regulations, and most importantly the Constitution. Therefore, the respondents were directed to allow the complainants to wear the dress of their choice and to raise awareness of the need for respect for diversity and pluralism in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious country such as Sri Lanka. Further, the Commission also concluded that the transfer of the complainants to a provincial school from a national school was in contravention of the National Transfer Policy and that the said transfers were not made on any recognizable grounds in the Establishment Code but was done capriciously, arbitrarily, and in a non-transparent manner. Most importantly, the Commission pointed out the importance of ensuring social media is not used in manner that leads to communal disharmony and, that expressions of hate and violence targeting a specific 61