Proof that Sri Lanka’s New Sexuality-Education Reforms are Not a Local Curriculum — but a UN & NGO-Driven Framework
Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Education and political leadership have publicly announced that new “sexuality-education” and “life-skills/health-wellbeing” reforms will be rolled out across schools. At the same time, UNFPA, UNESCO, UNICEF, and WHO — the four global agencies responsible for creating Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) — openly state in their own publications that the model they promote for Sri Lanka is based entirely on the International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE, Revised 2018). These agencies do not reference a locally developed Sri Lankan framework. They repeatedly insist that Sri Lanka’s sexuality-education standards, teacher training, and policy direction must be aligned with the global ITGSE template.
This exposes a critical concern:
Sri Lanka is rushing to adopt a curriculum framework that was not requested by parents, was not developed by Sri Lankan specialists, is culturally incompatible, and in several areas conflicts with Sri Lanka’s Constitution, religious values, and sections of the Penal Code related to child protection and moral safeguarding.
The central issue is simple:
Instead of a Sri Lankan-built curriculum grounded in local cultural, religious, and legal realities, what is being prepared for implementation is a standardised foreign framework driven by UN agencies and supported by NGO advocacy networks — rebranded locally under soft labels such as “life skills”, “wellbeing education”, “healthy living skills”, and “safe and enabling school environments.”
The evidence below shows a direct, documented chain:
- Government intent
- UN technical direction
- ITGSE as the content source
- Implementation inside Sri Lanka.
No part of this reform is locally authored, culturally grounded, constitutionally compliant, or aligned to Sri Lankan religious protections.
Direct Government / Ministerial Intent
- Ministry of Education (MOE) announced sexuality-education materials from pre-school to adulthood
MOE officials publicly confirmed new sexuality-education publications, covering “pre-school to adulthood”, with a launch on 7 March 2024.
This is the earliest admission that MOE has prepared materials covering the full age spectrum.
Sources:
- Ceylon Today (2024) — “provide education on sexuality from pre-school to adulthood”
https://ceylontoday.lk/2024/02/28/education-ministry-to-launch-sex-ed-publications-on-7-march/?
- Ada Derana reporting the same launch plans.
https://www.adaderana.lk/news.php?nid=97572&
This is a formal policy shift: Sri Lanka has committed to structured sexuality education.
- The Prime Minister / Education Minister admits CSE is being prepared for rollout
In November 2025, senior political leaders stated that “age-appropriate sex education” will be introduced and consultations with health experts are underway.
Source: Daily Mirror (2025).
The terms “age-appropriate”, “scientifically accurate”, “skills-based” are identical to definitions in ITGSE 2018.
When Sri Lankan leaders use this vocabulary, they are directly adopting the UN’s CSE framework.
This is clear, public confirmation of intent to implement a structured sexuality-education reform aligned with global CSE/ITGSE standards.
Sexuality Education in Sri Lanka is Linked to ITGSE 2018
ITGSE 2018 statement
“This Guidance provides the international technical standard for sexuality education.” — ITGSE, Introduction
UNFPA, UNICEF, UNESCO, and WHO jointly authored ITGSE; therefore, when they promote “CSE”, they mean ITGSE-aligned content only.
The subject is being externally enforced — not requested by Sri Lankan parents, teachers, religious bodies, or legal authorities while certain contents are violations of the constitution/penal code & culturally & religiously rejected.
Sri Lankan parents have never requested to introduce sexuality education for young children. Every time the MOE attempted to introduce such content, parents protested, leading to withdrawals or suspensions.
Evidence:
- 2019 “Grade 7 Health Textbook” Controversy
– Parents protested over diagrams on reproductive anatomy.
– Ministry withdrew the textbook content due to nationwide parent backlash.
Source: Daily Mirror, 2019 — “MOE withdraws controversial lessons…” - Religious leaders’ objections (2018–2024)
– All four major religions (Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Christian) issued statements rejecting UN-style CSE.
Sources: Mahanayake Theros statements 2023; Catholic Bishops Conference releases.
Evidence that UN Agencies require Sri Lanka to follow ITGSE
EVIDENCE 1
UNFPA Sri Lanka explicitly states that Sri Lanka’s CSE must follow ITGSE
“Comprehensive sexuality education (CSE), as outlined in the International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE), provides scientifically accurate, culturally relevant and age-appropriate information.”
— UNFPA Sri Lanka, Policy Brief 8: Comprehensive Sexuality Education in Sri Lanka
This sentence proves beyond debate that:
- UNFPA requires Sri Lanka to use ITGSE as the model.
- This is nota locally developed syllabus.
- “Cultural relevance” is defined by ITGSE, not Sri Lanka.
UNFPA also repeats the standard ITGSE global definition:
“CSE provides learners with knowledge, skills, attitudes and values to make informed choices about their bodies and relationships.”
EVIDENCE 2
UNESCO confirms ITGSE is the global technical standard
Inside ITGSE 2018 itself:
- “This Guidance provides the international technical standard for sexuality education.”
- “Countries are encouraged to align national curricula with the ITGSE recommendations.”
- “It is recommended that national authorities use the ITGSE as a reference when developing or revising curricula.”
UNESCO is part of the same UN cluster operating in Sri Lanka.
This is a direct instruction: Sri Lanka’s curriculum must be aligned with ITGSE.
EVIDENCE 3
UNFPA Sri Lanka Annual Report confirms ITGSE is the evidence base for MOE reforms
“UNFPA’s support to the Ministry of Education is based on global evidence and technical guidance, including the International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE).”
This proves:
- UNFPA’s work WITH the Ministry of Education is grounded directly in ITGSE.
- Teacher training, curriculum proposals, and policy advice are all ITGSE-derived.
- No local framework has replaced or superseded ITGSE.
EVIDENCE 4
UNICEF states it supports CSE in line with ITGSE
UNICEF (a co-author of ITGSE 2018) states:
“UNICEF supports comprehensive sexuality education in line with the International Technical Guidance.”
Therefore, any UNICEF-supported program in Sri Lanka = ITGSE content.
This shows the entire UN system is aligned behind a single template: ITGSE 2018.
Why ITGSE cannot be called a “Local” or “Sri Lankan” Model
- ITGSE does notreference:
The Sri Lankan Constitution
• The Penal Code
• Religious protections
• Cultural norms
• Parental authority
• Local sensitivities - There is no published Sri Lankan alternative to ITGSE.
- No adaptation process has been published by the Ministry or subject panels.
- All official UN documents state Sri Lanka must adopt ITGSE — not create its own model.
- Sri Lankan “experts” may claim “participation”, but they are participating inside a framework that is already defined externally.
The ITGSE content itself contains several competencies that directly conflict with Sri Lanka’s Constitution, Penal Code, cultural and religious teachings.
Problematic ITGSE Content:
- Teaching children about “sexual pleasure” –
ITGSE 2018, Section 6.1.2 — “Children should understand that sexual feelings, desire and pleasure are natural…”
- Introducing gender identity fluidity
ITGSE 2018, 6.2 & 6.3 — promoting understanding of “gender identity” and “gender expression” as fluid and self-defined.
- Consent education for minors
ITGSE 2018, 7.3.2 — “Learners should understand consent in sexual relations.”
→ Sri Lankan law prohibits ANY sexual activity with minors.
- Promoting acceptance of diverse sexual orientations
ITGSE 2018, 5.2.2 — “Promote respect for diverse sexual orientations and gender identities.”
Multiple countries that implemented ITGSE-based CSE have reported negative or mixed outcomes, including increased confusion among children, clashes with parental expectations, and social backlash. Several countries have reversed or heavily restricted CSE after public concern.
Evidence of International Failures:
- United Kingdom — CSE Rollback (2023–2024)
– Government launched a full review after parents reported oversexualization.
– Restrictions imposed on teaching gender identity.
Source: UK Department for Education Review, 2023.
- Scotland — Gender Content Overturned
– “Gender identity” guidance suspended due to psychological harm and safeguarding concerns.
Source: BBC Scotland, 2024.
- Spain — Parents’ Revolt (“Pin Parental”)
– Multiple regions adopted “parental veto” laws allowing parents to opt-out of CSE.
Source: El País, 2020.
- USA — 14 states banned or restricted CSE content
– States passed laws restricting gender identity and sexual content in schools after major backlash.
Source: Education Commission of the States, 2023.
- Finland — Reported increase in gender dysphoria among children after CSE’s introduction
Source: Finnish Health Authority Report (THL), 2022.
Legal Conflicts with the Sri Lankan Constitution & Penal Code
ITGSE-aligned CSE directly conflicts with several Sri Lankan constitutional and criminal-law protections, particularly regarding child safeguarding, parental authority, and religious protection.
Key Legal Conflicts:
- Sri Lankan Constitution — Article 9 (Buddhism Protection)
– State must protect and foster Buddhism.
→ ITGSE promotes sexual behaviours and identities inconsistent with Buddhist moral discipline.
- Sri Lankan Constitution — Articles 10 & 14(1)(e)
– Protect freedom of religion & conscience.
→ CSE imposes values contrary to the religious doctrine of all major faiths. - Penal Code — Sections 364, 365, 365A, 286, 308A
– Protect minors from sexual exposure and grooming.
→ Teaching minors about sexual pleasure, consent, and diverse sexual behaviours contradicts these protections. - Child Protection Authority Act (1999)
– Prohibits exposing children to sexualized materials.
→ ITGSE contains sexualized content inappropriate for minors. - Obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
– Requires policies to align with cultural, moral, and religious values of the community.
→ ITGSE fails this requirement.
How UN Agencies shape Local Curriculum without local mandate
UN agencies influence Sri Lanka’s education policy through a coordinated framework that combines funding, technical support, curriculum steering, and NGO partnerships. This creates a structural dependency that results in the adoption of foreign models like ITGSE.
Mechanisms of Influence (Evidence-based):
- Technical Working Groups inside the MOE
– UNFPA and UNICEF sit on advisory committees drafting “life skills” and “wellbeing” content.
Source: UNFPA Sri Lanka Annual Report, 2022. - Funding Leverage
– Curriculum reform projects receive donor funding tied to ITGSE compliance.
Example: UNFPA-supported “Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health (ASRH) Programme.” - Capacity-Building & Teacher Training
– MOE teachers are trained using ITGSE-based modules.
Source: UNICEF Sri Lanka Education Programme Reports. - Partnership with Local NGOs
– NGOs such as FPA Sri Lanka, EQUAL GROUND, and others promote ITGSE concepts through schools.
Source: FPA Sri Lanka Annual Report, 2021. - Policy Guidance Documents
– UN agencies supply ready-made “toolkits” that the MOE adopts with minimal local adaptation.
Source: UNFPA/UNESCO joint technical guidance, 2018–2023.
The sexuality-education being prepared for Sri Lanka is not locally designed, not culturally grounded, and not legally aligned with Sri Lanka’s constitutional, religious, or Penal Code protections.
This is why it must be opposed.
The documented facts establish a single, irrefutable line:
- Government confirmed intentto introduce sexuality education.
- UN agencies supply the framework.
- UNFPA, UNESCO, UNICEF and WHO all specify ITGSE 2018 as the required standard.
- The Ministry of Education receives technical support based on ITGSE.
- No Sri Lankan-authored CSE framework exists to replace or modify ITGSE.
Therefore, Sri Lanka’s upcoming sexuality-education reforms are a direct extension of ITGSE 2018—the global CSE syllabus—introduced through UN agencies, and not a product of Sri Lankan educational philosophy, culture, religion, or law.
Shenali D Waduge
