News
Energy Minister lashes out at international funding agencies
Criticism of Electricity Act Amendments:
Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody has lashed out at the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), and the World Bank over their public criticism of amendments to the Electricity Act, accusing them of bypassing diplomatic channels and politicising the issue.
“This is not how it should be done. They can’t work with us like this,” Minister Jayakody said in a televised interview on Thursday. “They should have handled it more diplomatically instead of going public.”
His remarks follow a joint letter issued by the three development partners raising red flags over provisions in the Electricity Act 2024. The letter voiced concern over clauses mandating permanent state ownership of electricity entities, proposed restructuring of the National Transmission Network Service Provider (NTNSP), and regulatory control over tariffs.
The ADB, the JICA and the World Bank have written to the Energy Minister regarding several key issues concerning the Electricity Act 2024 Amendments published in the Gazette recently.
The World Bank, ADB and JICA have been the major development partners in the power sector of Sri Lanka. The three institutions coordinate closely on key policy issues, investments, and technical assistance.
In a letter addressed to Minister Jayakody recently, the institutions thanked the Ministry of Energy and the Power Sector Reforms Secretariat for their continued engagement over the past several months on this topic.
However, they highlight four issues in the version of the Amendments to the Electricity Act 2024 published in the Gazette and being proposed to Parliament for consideration, which they believe impede the original intent and spirit of the Act regarding sector efficiency, good governance, and financial sustainability, all with the ultimate objective of ensuring a high quality of service to consumers at affordable prices.
“We share these comments in the spirit of supporting the Government of Sri Lanka in the smooth implementation of the final version of the Act and ensuring a strong energy sector for the future,” said the letter, signed by the Country Manager of the World Bank and IFC, ADB Country Director and JICA’s Chief Representative of Sri Lanka Office.
The issues highlighted in the letter are as follows:
Permanent Government Ownership
Section 17 of the principal Act, subsection 2 is amended with entities denoted as (a), (e), (f), (g), and (h)(ii) will remain “permanently” owned by the Government (through Secretary to the Treasury). The rationale for maintaining 100% Government ownership for the NSO, NTNSP, and Pension Liabilities Company is understood. However, legislating permanent 100% Government ownership in the Act, will increase the burden on the state, limit any private investment or opportunities into the Generation Company and Distribution Company, and only hinder the Government’s options for development in a sector with large investment needs.
National Transmission Network Service Provider (NTNSP)
Clause 20, subclause 3: The preliminary transfer plan includes LTL Holdings under the NTNSP. LTL Holdings owns and operates over 1GW of generation assets in Sri Lanka and abroad. Additionally, LTL has multiple other businesses including transmission and distribution projects, transformer manufacturing and other engineering projects. In the same clause, the preliminary transfer plan also includes Sri Lanka Energies under the NTNSP. Sri Lanka Energies has approximately 15 MW of mini-hydro plants, and other businesses including manufacturing meter components.
Having both companies under NTNSP would in turn create a generation company owning approximately 20% of Sri Lanka’s generation assets as well as multiple other businesses, come under the responsibility of the NTNSP. Given the urgent need to upgrade the transmission network and the renewable energy integration needs, bundling businesses outside the core function of NTNSP will likely result in a deterioration in the operations of those businesses and a distraction from the core functions of NTNSP. It will also detract from the principal objective of separating the core functions of the CEB, in this case transmission vs generation, and introducing the necessary transparency and removal of conflicts of interest, which were one of the cornerstones of the reforms.
Distribution Company
Clause 20, subclause 4: The preliminary transfer plan assumes the Distribution Company will assume “the assets, liabilities and functions” of LECO. LECO has been operating as an independent company from CEB distribution divisions and has adopted operational efficiencies and innovations for its customers and employees. This proposal will imply that a distribution company/licensee is going to fully absorb another distribution company/licensee, without considering the commercial, operational and legal ramifications.
The creation of a large NTNSP and Distribution Company, combined with the removal of restrictions on a single entity or Government of Sri Lanka acquiring multiple unbundled entities (clause 15, subclause 3) leaves an opening to reverse the unbundling, and return to a system of operational inefficiencies, conflicts of interests, and poor governance, all at a cost to the consumer.
Role of the regulator in tariff setting
Section 29, subsection 3 is amended with the following language: “by the substitution for the words “in accordance with the national tariff policy”, of the words “in consultation with the Ministry of Finance” rather than “after consultation with Ministry of Finance”. We have noted in previous communications that while this was accepted as a reasonable compromise in theory, we want to reiterate that this could pose challenges when trying to implement the act as this language is unclear and open to interpretation and/or legal challenge since there is ambiguity on who has final authority and accountability on tariff setting.
These changes could undermine the overarching objectives of the Electricity Act and the commitments made by the Government under the Asian Development Bank’s Policy-based Loan and World Bank’s Development Policy Operation. It will also weaken the attractiveness of Sri Lanka for investors, contrary to the Government’s intentions. We urge the Government to consider the points stated in this letter and amend the clauses to ensure they align with the core objectives of the Electricity Act—good governance, competitive procurement, regulatory independence, and financial sustainability.
‘Media freedom will be in jeopardy’
Former Minister of Justice, Constitutional Affairs, National Integration and Foreign Affairs Prof. G. L. Peiris has warned that the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA) will deal a severe blow to civil liberties and democratic rights, particularly media freedom and the overall freedom of expression.
Addressing a press conference organised by the joint opposition alliance “Maha Jana Handa” (Voice of the People) in Colombo, Prof. Peiris said the proposed legislation at issue had been designed “not to protect people from terrorism but to protect the State.”
Prof. Peiris said that the proposed law would sound the death knell for the rights long enjoyed by citizens, with journalists and media institutions likely to be among those worst affected.
Prof. Peiris took exception to what he described as the generous use of the concept of “recklessness” in the draft, particularly in relation to the publication of statements and dissemination of material. He argued that recklessness was recognised in criminal jurisprudence as a state of mind distinct from intention and its scope was traditionally limited.
“In this draft, it becomes yet another lever for the expansion of liability well beyond the properly designated category of terrorist offences,” Prof. Peiris said, warning that the elasticity of the term could expose individuals to prosecution on tenuous grounds.
Prof. Peiris was particularly critical of a provision enabling a suspect already in judicial custody to be transferred to police custody on the basis of a detention order issued by the Defence Secretary.
According to the proposed laws such a transfer could be justified on the claim that the suspect had committed an offence prior to arrest of which police were previously unaware, he said.
“The desirable direction of movement is from police to judicial custody. Here, the movement is in the opposite direction,” Prof. Peiris said, cautioning that although the authority of a High Court Judge was envisaged, the pressures of an asserted security situation could render judicial oversight ineffective in practice.
Describing the draft as “a travesty rather than a palliative,” Prof. Peiris said the government had reneged on assurances that reform would address longstanding concerns about existing counter-terrorism legislation. Instead of removing objectionable features, he argued, the new bill introduced additional provisions not found in the current Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).
Among them is a clause empowering the Defence Secretary to designate “prohibited places”. That was a power not contained in the PTA but previously exercised, if at all, under separate legislation such as the Official Secrets Act of 1955. Entry into such designated places, as well as photographing, video recording, sketching or drawing them, would constitute an offence punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to Rs. 3 million. Prof. Peiris said. Such provision would have a “particularly chilling effect” on journalists and media personnel, he noted.
The former minister and law professor also criticised the breadth of offences defined under the draft, noting that it sought to create 13 categories of acts carrying the label of terrorism. This, he said, blurred the critical distinction between ordinary criminal offences and acts of terrorism, which require “clear and unambiguous definition with no scope for elasticity of interpretation.”
He cited as examples offences such as serious damage to public property, robbery, extortion, theft, and interference with electronic or computerised systems—acts which, he argued, were already adequately covered under existing penal laws and did not necessarily amount to terrorism.
Ancillary offences, too, had been framed in sweeping terms, Prof. Peiris said. The draft legislation, dealing with acts ‘associated with terrorism,’ imposed liability on persons “concerned in” the commission of a terrorist offence. “This is a vague phrase and catch-all in nature.” he noted.
Similarly, under the subheading ‘Encouragement of Terrorism,’ with its reference to “indirect encouragement,” could potentially encompass a broad spectrum of protest activity, Prof. Peiris maintained, warning that the provision on “Dissemination of Terrorist Publications” could render liable any person who provides a service enabling others to access such material. “The whole range of mainstream and social media is indisputably in jeopardy,” Prof. Peiris said.
Former Minister Anura Priyadarshana Yapa and SLFP Chairman Nimal Siripala de Silva also addressed the media at the briefing.
by Saman Indrajith ✍️
SJB Gampaha District MP Harshana Rajakaruna has written to the Chairman of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC), Neil Iddawala, urging immediate action over attempts to interfere with evidence relating to a corruption complaint against Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne and his private secretary, Chameera Gallage.
In his letter, Rajakaruna refers to a complaint lodged on February 2, 2026, by Parliament’s suspended Deputy Secretary General Chaminda Kularatne under the Anti-Corruption Act No. 9 of 2023, naming the Speaker and his private secretary.
The Opposition MP has stated that Gallage subsequently wrote to the Secretary General of Parliament on 06 February, seeking a report on matters connected to the complaint. Rajakaruna alleges that Gallage’s letter amounts to an attempt to conceal or alter evidence and to influence potential witnesses.
The Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) has launched a probe into the distribution of substandard Ondansetron injections to state hospitals following the deaths of two patients who received the drug.
The stock of Ondansetron has been imported from an Indian pharmaceutical company and distributed to several hospitals, according to a complaint lodged with the CIABOC.
Two patients, one at the Kandy Hospital and another at the Mulleriyawa National Institute of Health Sciences, died after suffering adverse complications subsequent to the administration of the injection.
by Sujeewa Thathsara ✍️
Kishan, Hardik, spinners hand India record win
Showers expected in the Central, North-central , Uva, Eastern, Southern and Northern provinces and in Kaluthara district
GL: Proposed anti-terror laws will sound death knell for democracy
SJB complains to bribery commission about alleged bid to interfere with evidence
Substandard Ondansetron: CIABOC launches probe
Shanaka fireworks helps Sri Lanka thrash Oman
‘Dates have the highest sugar content to fight Coronavirus’
Sunday Island 27 December – Headlines
#SundayIsland 17th December – Headlines
Sunday Island – 28th March
Sunday Island Headlines – 21 March
Sunday Island – 21st February – Headlines
-
Features5 days agoMy experience in turning around the Merchant Bank of Sri Lanka (MBSL) – Episode 3
-
Business6 days agoZone24x7 enters 2026 with strong momentum, reinforcing its role as an enterprise AI and automation partner
-
Business5 days agoRemotely conducted Business Forum in Paris attracts reputed French companies
-
Business5 days agoFour runs, a thousand dreams: How a small-town school bowled its way into the record books
-
Business5 days agoComBank and Hayleys Mobility redefine sustainable mobility with flexible leasing solutions
-
Business2 days agoAutodoc 360 relocates to reinforce commitment to premium auto care
-
Business6 days agoHNB recognized among Top 10 Best Employers of 2025 at the EFC National Best Employer Awards
-
Midweek Review2 days agoA question of national pride