News
“Move to hand over Sevanagala Sugar Co. to Daya G alleged”: PMD responds
Dhanushka Ramanayake, Director General (Media) of the President’s Media Division (PMD) has sent us the following clarification:
“The attention of President’s Media Division has beenbrought to the news item on pages 01 and 02 of The Island newspaper dated 30.10.2023, titled “Move to hand over Sevanagala Sugar Co. to Daya G alleged.”
Mr. Daya Gamage, a Sri Lankan entrepreneur and an active member of the United National Party under the leadership of President Ranil Wickremesinghe, is closely associated with politics. This connection highlights that any insinuation of a “conflict among allies” in the news, whether intentional or inadvertent, is misleading and based on incorrect information.
In the spirit of our mutual commitment to delivering accurate information to the public, we wish to present the correct details regarding the news piece in The Island newspaper from 30.10.2023, titled ‘Move to hand over Sevanagala Sugar Co. to Daya G alleged.’
No decision or proposal has been made to transfer Sevanagala Sugar Company to Daya Group.
As per the report in The Island newspaper, the Sevanagala Sugar Factory was brought under government ownership through the Revival of Underperforming Enterprises or Underutilized Assets Act No. 43 of 2011. This act also facilitated the government’s acquisition of several financially struggling institutions, including the Pelwatta Sugar Factory, Hilton Hotel and Grand Hyatt Hotel.
At the time of this acquisition, the investment in the Sevanagala Sugar Factory was attributed to the Daya Group Company, which is owned by Mr. Daya Gamage, a notable Sri Lankan entrepreneur. In cases where financial losses were incurred by investors due to the government takeover of these struggling businesses a designated assessment committee was appointed. The provisions of the same act were invoked to determine and provide compensation where warranted.
Consequently, compensation was disbursed to the companies taken over by the government. However, in the case of the Sevanagala Sugar Company, no compensation was forthcoming due to specific technical issues.
In response to this situation, Mr. Daya Gamage, as the investor in the Sevanagala Sugar Company, initiated three legal proceedings to seek compensation or the return of the property. He expressed his willingness to regain ownership and resume business operations without requiring compensation as an alternative resolution.
The government’s decision in this matter was to provide compensation rather than returning the property. In response, employees at the Sevanagala Sugar Company filed two fundamental rights cases in the Supreme Court, both of which are currently awaiting resolution.
To calculate the compensation owed to the investor for the handover of the Sevanagala Sugar Company to the government a Compensation Commission was re-established. This commission’s task is to assess the losses suffered by the investor encompassing property not only the immovable property of the Sevanagala Sugar Company but also considering the business losses incurred due to the acquisition of specific motor vehicles, machinery and equipment meant for its further development.
The Compensation Commission is chaired by the Chief Valuator of the Government and includes two retired Chief Appraisers from the Government Valuation Department as members. They are responsible for conducting the compensation calculations. To maintain transparency throughout this process, the investor has been granted approval by the cabinet to appoint a monitor.
As it stands, the government’s decision is to compensate the investor for property acquisition losses and business losses determined by the Compensation Commission. No proposal or decision has been made regarding the reversion of the property, and such a proposal has not been approved by the Cabinet.
In an effort to ensure transparency in government property disposal, a new Public Enterprises Reform Unit has been established, with criteria approved by the Cabinet. If the property is to be re-disposed, it will be done through a transparent tender process following these established guidelines.
It’s important to note that the government has not chosen to return the property to the previous investor through any other procedure and an additional related case is still pending in court.
In the spirit of providing a fair platform for all information, I kindly request that you give the same level of publicity to this accurate account as you did to the initial news in the newspaper.
Latest News
Landslide Early Warnings issued to the Districts of Badulla, Kalutara, Kandy, Kegalle, Kurunegala, Matale and Monaragala
The National Building Research Organisation (NBRO) has issued landslide early warnings to the districts of Badulla, Kalutara, Kandy, Kegalle, Kurunegala, Matale and Monaragala effective untill 2100hrs on 12th May 2026.
Accordingly,
Level II landslide early warnings have been issued to the divisional secretaries division and surrounding areas of Passara in the Badulla district.
Level I landslide early warnings have been issued to the divisional secretaries divisions and surrounding areas of Bandarawela in the Badulla district, Walallawita in the Kalutara district, Pasbage Korale, Akurana, Gangawata Korale, Panvila, Yatinuwara, Ganga Ihala Korale, Doluwa and Udapalatha in the Kandy district, Mawanella, Bulathkohupitiya, Yatiyanthota, Aranayaka, Kegalle and Rambukkana in the Kegalle district, Rideegama in the Kurunegala district, Rattota, Naula and Ambanganga Korale in the Matale district and Badalkumbura and Wellawaya in the Monaragala district.
News
Showers about 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central, Uva, Southern, North-western, Northern and North-central provinces and in Trincomalee district.
WEATHER FORECAST FOR 11 MAY 2026
Issued at 05.30 a.m. on 11 May 2026 by the Department of Meteorology
The low-level atmospheric disturbance in the vicinity of Sri Lanka is likely to develop into a low-pressure area around the next 36 hours. Therefore, the prevailing showery conditions over the island are expected to continue during the next few days.
Showers or thundershowers will occur at times in most parts of the island and Cloudy skies are expected, under the influence of the aforementioned system. Heavy showers about 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central, Uva, Southern, North-western, Northern and North-central provinces and in Trincomalee district.
The general public is kindly requested to take adequate precautions to minimize damage caused by temporary localized strong winds and lightning during thundershowers.
News
Treasury theft: Speaker’s conduct brought to IPU’s attention: SJB
SJB MP Dayasiri Jayasekera has sought the intervention of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) to pressure the JVP-NPP government to respect the rights of the Opposition.
MP Jayasekera told The Island that they wouldn’t allow the NPP to suppress the truth regarding the theft of Treasury funds amounting to USD 2.5 million. He accused Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremaratne of depriving the Opposition of its legitimate rights, at the behest of the government.
Jayasekera said that the Speaker’s conduct regarding the action taken against Deputy Secretary General of Parliament Chaminda Kularatne, too, had been brought to the notice of IPU and other international associations.
The text of MP Jayasekera’s letter to the Secretary general of IPU: “I respectfully submit this petition seeking the attention and intervention of the Inter-Parliamentary Union concerning a matter affecting parliamentary accountability, the rights of elected representatives, and the proper functioning of constitutional oversight within the Parliament of Sri Lanka.
On 06 May 2026, I Dayasiri Jayasekara MP submitted a formal request to the Hon. Speaker of Parliament seeking permission, under the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act No. 21 of 1953 and Standing Order 29(1), to raise a question of privilege regarding alleged constitutional and parliamentary violations by Mr. Harshana Suriyapperuma, Secretary to the Treasury of Sri Lanka.
The proposed privilege motion raised matters including:
1. Alleged violations of Articles 148, 149, and 150 of the Constitution of Sri Lanka concerning parliamentary control over public finance;
2. Alleged failure to report to Parliament concerning a controversial and unlawful transfer of approximately USD 2.5 million from the Treasury;
3. Alleged non-compliance with parliamentary committee procedures under the Standing Orders of Parliament;
4. Questions relating to constitutional eligibility under Article 91(1)(d)(xiii) of the Constitution concerning dual citizenship and qualification to sit and vote in Parliament;
5. A request that the matter be referred to the Parliamentary Ethics and Privileges Committee established under Standing Order 118.
Despite the seriousness of the constitutional and parliamentary issues raised, the Hon. Speaker declined permission for the privilege issue to be raised in Parliament.
It is respectfully submitted that this refusal has the effect of:
• Preventing an elected Member of Parliament from exercising his parliamentary oversight function;
• Restricting parliamentary scrutiny over matters involving public finance and constitutional accountability;
• Undermining the privileges of Members of Parliament to raise matters of urgent public importance;
• Limiting institutional transparency concerning allegations involving senior state officials.
The right of parliamentarians to raise questions of privilege and matters relating to constitutional governance is an essential component of parliamentary democracy and legislative independence. The refusal to permit even the presentation or preliminary consideration of such a matter raises serious concerns regarding parliamentary accountability mechanisms in Sri Lanka.
Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Inter-Parliamentary Union:
1.Take cognizance of this matter as one affecting the rights and functions of Members of Parliament;
2.Seek clarification from the relevant parliamentary authorities in Sri Lanka regarding the grounds upon which the privilege motion was disallowed;
3.Consider whether the refusal is compatible with internationally recognised principles of parliamentary democracy, accountability, and freedom of parliamentary speech;
4. Encourage the Parliament of Sri Lanka to ensure fair and transparent procedures governing parliamentary privilege motions and constitutional oversight.
I further request that this communication be placed before the appropriate committee or mechanism within the IPU dealing with the rights and duties of parliamentarians.”
-
News5 days agoMIT expert warns of catastrophic consequences of USD 2.5 mn Treasury heist
-
News7 days agoCJ urged to inquire into AKD’s remarks on May 25 court verdict
-
News2 days agoLanka Port City officials to meet investors in Dubai
-
Editorial5 days agoClean Sri Lanka and dirty politics
-
Opinion7 days agoSecurity, perception, and trust: Sri Lanka’s delicate balancing act
-
Editorial4 days agoThe Vijay factor
-
News3 days agoSLPP expresses concern over death of former SriLankan CEO
-
News6 days agoDevelopment Officer bids Rs. 48 mn for CPC’s V8 at auction
