Many reports coming out of Sri Lanka and Myanmar appear to be one-sided. I think news about mis-behaving Buddhists are a novelty and sells better. I do not know much about the events in Sri Lanka except for the halal-issue which I followed for awhile.
The report said " As for the ban on the Halal logo, an obvious barrier to the religious freedom of Muslims in the country, Withinage considered Halal as something “that Muslims should enjoy”, but also kindly pointed out that “Halal is used by Muslim organisations to promote Islam; to promote Muslim fundamentalism." This does not give the correct impression at all. Sri Lankans really do not care about the dietary requirements of the nation's Muslims who comprise about 10% of the population. For centuries, Muslims have been free to choose their own diet and label it accordingly. This has not changed and there has been no ban on the use of halal markings on their food.
The complain was the requirement by a certain Islamic organisation for the nation's food manufacturers to certify if their food was halal and which the government acceded to. To avoid cost of dual processing lines (one halal and the other non-halal) manufacturers made all their food halal. Manufacturers are also required to pay a fee to the Islamic organisation for the halal certification based on their production. So the effect was that thousands of manufacturers are now enriching the Islamic organisation and is funded by the country's majority Buddhist population. Millions of Buddhists now have to bear part of the additional cost of the halal certification which they did not request.
Not only is this obviously unjust, the consistent poor reporting in many such articles is quite damaging as can be seen by some of the responses here.