Opinion

The national single window: Paving the way for paperless trade

Published

4 years ago

2022/01/8

By Mithara Fonseka and Kavishka Indraratna

In 2016, Sri Lanka ratified its Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) with the WTO and in 2017 a Secretariat was established for the National Trade Facilitation Committee to drive much needed trade reforms in the country. Currently, the rate of Sri Lanka’s implementation commitments under TFA stands at 34.9% with a timeframe ranging from 2017-2030. Reforms include the Trade Information Portal, streamlining customs processes and revamping the systems for post-clearance audit. However, progress of one of the key reforms, the National Single Window (NSW), has been stalled. Deviating from the initial time frame of completing the Single Window in December 2022, the target date has been delayed to 2030. The NSW, a globally recognised trading portal, acts as a one-stop shop for exporters and importers where customs documents, permits, registrations and other information can be submitted online at once. The definition of a Single Window, as provided by the UN/CEFACT Recommendation No. 33, is as follows: “A Single Window is defined as a facility that allows parties involved in trade and transport to lodge standardized information and documents with a single entry point to fulfil all import, export, and transit-related regulatory requirements. If information is electronic, then individual data elements should only be submitted once”. Putting such a reform on the back-burner will only delay Sri Lanka’s transition to a system of streamlined, paperless trade processes and therefore acts as an impediment to local and foreign investment.

Why should Sri Lanka implement a NSW?

Sri Lanka has been underperforming in global trade rankings, where we sometimes rank in the bottom 50 countries. According to the Ease of Doing Business in 2020, in the trading across borders pillar, Sri Lanka ranks 96 out of 190 economies. While several of Sri Lanka’s indicators perform better than the South Asian average, there is significant room for improvement. When comparing with OECD standards, Sri Lanka takes 72 hours for border compliance regarding imports and 48 hours for export documentary compliance whereas the OECD average stands at 8.5 and 2.3 hours respectively. Lengthy customs procedures and multiple inspections impede efficiency. Meanwhile, we ranked 94 out of 160 countries under World’s Bank 2018 Logistics Performance index and 103 out of 136 for the World Economic Forum’s 2016 Enabling Trade index. Notably, one of the indicators from the Enabling Trade Index, the customs services index, which considers factors such as clearance of shipments via electronic data interchange and the separation of physical release of goods from fiscal control, we rank 116 out of 117 countries. A lack of transparency, inter-agency coordination and lengthy cumbersome processes contribute to Sri Lanka’s poor trade environment. An average trade transaction can involve over 30 different agencies and upto 200 data elements, a lot of which have to be repeated. There is thus an evident need to streamline trade processes through digitisation, creating a business friendly environment that supports small businesses as well as foreign investors.

A Background into the National Single Window

In 1989, the Government of Singapore introduced the world’s first NSW, known as Tradenet. It took two years for the model to become operational and has now become one of the most advanced models in the world. Since then, many countries have adopted similar models and a NSW has become a critical tool in facilitating efficient and paperless trade. The annual survey conducted by The United Nations on trade facilitation identified that almost 74% of countries surveyed in the Asia Pacific region have to some extent engaged in creating a NSW (this includes countries which are only in the pilot stage). While a NSW is universally known for promoting the transition from paper-based to electronic customs processing, each window developed by a country is unique and varies according to the context of the country. For example, in Chile and Malaysia, the NSW enables traders to submit their export and import declarations, manifests and their trade-related documents to customs authorities electronically. In Korea and Hong Kong, private sector participants including banks, customs brokers, insurance companies and freight forwarders are also connected through the portal.

Single entry, single submission, standardized documents and data, sharing of information (information dissemination), centralised risk management, coordination of agencies and stakeholders, analytical capability and electronic payment facilities are some of the key functions included in a Single Window. In Sri Lanka, the World Bank did several studies on the NSW, identifying different operational models, best practices and a final blueprint document was given to the government and Sri Lanka Customs (SLC) in July 2019. However, since then, there has been no news of progress. While many countries including Sri Lanka are keen to emulate Singapore’s pioneering model, a lack of clear targets and timelines deteriorate the chances of implementing such a system.

The Mutual Benefits of a NSW

Businesses in countries without an integrated trade system find it difficult to compete in the international arena given the time and money spent to simply get clearance. Streamlining the entire process from start to finish in a manner that’s comprehensive and transparent, sans bureaucracy has a number of positive effects for traders. It was estimated that Singapore’s TradeNet saved its traders around US$1 billion per year. Korea’s uTradeHub allowed its business community to save approximately US$ 818.9 million. These were savings from the use of e-documents, automated administrative work and information storage and retrieval with the use of ICT. A Single Window automatically simplifies the compliance requirements traders face. In Mozambique traders benefited from faster clearance times, where through the NSW, the time was reduced from 3 days to a few hours. Meanwhile, Thailand’s NSW transformed the customs clearance turnaround time (measured as per declaration) to 95% in 5 minutes. Using a single portal has enabled traders to avoid visiting multiple agencies and simply submit an application at their convenience from any location. NSW has supported businesses through the removal of unnecessary costs, time and red tape, factors which tend to act as key deterrents to small businesses as well as foreign enterprises.

The NSW system has similarly provided noteworthy cost-savings for government entities involved in trade. Singapore Customs, has claimed that for every US$1 earned in customs revenue, it only spends 1 cent, implying a profit margin of 9,900%. In Hong Kong, trade facilitation measures have provided them with HK$1.3 billion in annual savings. The NSW has also reduced revenue leakages which may arise through transit. For example, Mozambique is a transit country to Swaziland, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia and Malawi. By expanding their NSW to include value added services such as GPS tracking of consignments in transit, automatic detection of breaches in consignment and deviation from assigned transit corridors the NSW prevents revenue leakages and the opportunity for corruption, maximising revenue collection. The NSW has further led to productivity and efficiency improvements. A Single Window has enabled authorities to handle a larger volume of applications with much more ease. Mozambique, which used to face infrastructural weaknesses, through the implementation of its single window, is able to handle roughly 1,500 custom declarations per day. Shifting to paperless customs processes would reduce costs for inventory and assist in improved resource allocation as personnel would not be required for trivial and mundane tasks such as preparation and cross checking of numerous documents. In totality, a fully digitised system provides government agencies with the means to do away with inefficiencies that hold back the speed of document processing, approval, communication and inspection stages. Further contributing to efficency, a NSW has also facilitated the dissemination of data through multiple agencies ranging from border control authorities, freight forwarders, customs brokers, shipping agents, banks and so on. As a result, there is improved inter-agency coordination and increased transparency.

Apart from a substantial increase in government revenue, the NSW will contribute to an improved business environment in Sri Lanka. The domino effects include an upward movement in the country’s global rankings, incentives for FDI and local business as well as a global recognition.

Driving forces for implementation

While the NSW on the surface seems like an IT-based innovation, it is rather a platform for inter-agency and private sector collaboration. As the NSW is a system which requires involvement from government, the private sector and the transport community, it is crucial to ensure inter-agency collaboration. Ensuring public-private sector participation, introducing mandates and a steering committee to oversee implementation is crucial in developing such a system. The system as a whole is one that constantly evolves with no end stage. It requires continuous maintenance, support, and enhancement. This should be supplemented by the appropriate legislation, disclosure and publishing, backed by training and airtight data security policies. Thus governance of the NSW needs to be executed appropriately so that new technologies, techniques and new modes of trade can be leveraged. In best performing nations, a Single Window is not considered a single system but rather “a combination of trade-related platforms that serve various trade communities and modalities”. This has enabled leading countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong to facilitate seamless trade by building an environment of interoperable trade systems.

Kavishka Indraratna is a Research Analyst at the Advocata Institute. She can be contacted at kavishka@advocata.org. Mithara Fonseka is a Researcher at the Advocata Institute. She can be contacted at mithara.advocata@gmail.com. The Advocata Institute is an Independent Public Policy Think Tank. Learn more about Advocata’s work at www.advocata.org.

All News Advertisement

Opinion

U.S. foreign policy double standards and Iran’s Iron theocracy

Published

18 hours ago

2026/03/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

The world’s most theatrical stage

Welcome to the Grand Circus

If global geopolitics were a TV show, it would be cancelled after the first season for being too unbelievable. Consider the plot: the world’s largest arms exporter lectures others about peace; a government that executed over 500 people in a single year tells its citizens it governs by divine law; and international bodies created to enforce rules seem to apply those rules with remarkable … flexibility. Welcome to the real world of international relations, where the rules are made up and the principles don’t matter.

This analysis examines two of the most consequential actors shaping global instability today: the United States of America, a democracy that can’t quite decide whether it believes in democracy, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, a theocracy that has perfected the art of punishing its own people for simply existing.

Episode I: The United States, ‘Do as I Say, Not as I Do’

The Democracy Export Business

The United States has, for decades, positioned itself as the global guardian of democracy, freedom, and human rights. It is a noble brand. The marketing budget alone, in the form of military expenditure at $886 billion in 2023, is staggering. And yet, the product being sold and the product being delivered have often been … different things.

The CIA-backed coup of 1953, codenamed Operation Ajax, removed Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and reinstated the autocratic Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, primarily to protect Anglo-American oil interests.

Nuclear Exceptionalism: The World’s Worst-Kept Secret

The United States currently holds approximately 5,044–5,177 nuclear warheads (depending on the source and year), while Russia being the largest with a stockpile estimated at approximately 5,580 warheads. yet it leads international campaigns demanding that other nations not develop nuclear weapons. This is a bit like the world’s most heavily armed person standing at the door of a gun shop, telling customers they cannot purchase firearms.

Furthermore, Israel is widely believed to possess 80–90 nuclear warheads. The United States has never imposed sanctions on Israel for this. India and Pakistan, both outside the NPT, were rewarded with nuclear cooperation deals after the tested nuclear weapons.

The Saudi Arabia Paradox

Perhaps, no relationship illustrates U.S. foreign policy hypocrisy more vividly than Washington’s alliance with Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom is an absolute monarchy with no elections, no free press, where women were legally barred from driving until 2018, and where the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, carried out, according to U.S. intelligence, on orders from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, resulted in … arms sales continuing and diplomatic ties intact.

The United States sold Saudi Arabia over $37 billion in arms between 2015 and 2020, weapons used in a Yemen war that the United Nations described as one of the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophes. Yet the U.S. simultaneously held press conferences about human rights. The cognitive dissonance is not a bug. It is the feature.

Iraq: The Weapons of Mass Distraction

In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq on the basis of alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that did not exist. The invasion resulted in an estimated 150,000–1,000,000 Iraqi civilian deaths depending on methodology, the displacement of millions, the destabilization of an entire region, and the rise of the Islamic State, none of which appeared in the original brochure. The officials responsible for this foreign policy catastrophe faced no international tribunal. No sanctions were imposed on the United States. Several architects of the war are today respected media commentators.

Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court (ICC), an institution the United States has never ratified, is expected to hold others to account for far lesser offenses. As of 2024, the U.S. has actively sanctioned ICC officials who attempted to investigate American personnel for potential war crimes in Afghanistan.

Episode II: Iran, The People’s Nightmare

Iran’s political system is built on the concept of Velayat-e Faqih, the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist, a political-theological doctrine holding that a senior Islamic cleric should govern society. In practice, this means that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, unelected by the general public, holds veto power over all branches of government, controls the military, the judiciary, state media, and the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The elected president, whether ‘moderate’ or ‘hardliner’, operates within a system where real power resides with the Supreme Leader and an unelected Guardian Council that vets all candidates and can disqualify anyone it deems insufficiently Islamic. In the 2021 presidential election, the Guardian Council disqualified over 590 candidates out of 592 who applied. The word ‘election’ is being used loosely here.

Women’s Rights: A Systematic Dismantling

Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iranian women have endured one of the most comprehensive rollbacks of rights in modern history. Within weeks of the revolution, mandatory hijab laws were imposed, women were barred from serving as judges, and the minimum marriage age for girls was reduced to 9 years (later revised to 13 in 1982). This was not incidental policy; it was ideological architecture.

Today, Iranian women face legal discrimination across virtually every domain. Under the Iranian Civil Code, a woman’s testimony in court counts as half that of a man’s. Women cannot travel abroad without the written permission of their husband or male guardian. Married women cannot work without spousal consent in many circumstances. The diyeh (blood money) for a woman’s life is legally valued at half that of a man.

In September 2022, 22-year-old Mahsa (Zhina) Amini died in the custody of Iran’s Morality Police, after being arrested for allegedly wearing her hijab improperly. Her death triggered the Woman, Life, Freedom uprising, one of the largest protest movements in Iranian history. The government’s response was to kill over 500 protesters, arrest more than 19,000, and execute at least four people in connection with the protests by early 2023.

The IRGC and State-Sponsored Repression

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is a military-economic-political entity unlike any other in the region. It controls an estimated 20–40% of Iran’s economy through businesses, construction contracts, and import monopolies. It commands proxy militias across Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. And it suppresses domestic dissent with a ruthlessness that has drawn consistent condemnation from United Nations human rights bodies.

Amnesty International’s 2022-2023 annual report documented the IRGC and security forces using live ammunition, birdshot, and metal pellets against protesters, deliberately targeting eyes, resulting in hundreds being blinded. The UN Special Rapporteur on Iran documented ‘serious, widespread and systematic human rights violations’ constituting potential crimes against humanity.

Episode III: Where the Two Hypocrisies Meet

The relationship between the United States and Iran is, in many ways, a story of two entities who deserve each other in the sense that the behavUior of each government has fed the domestic narrative of the other for decades.

Washington uses Iran as justification for its military presence in the Gulf, its arms sales to autocratic Gulf states, and its general posture as indispensable regional hegemon. Tehran uses American hostility and sanctions as justification for economic failure, political repression, and nuclear advancement. Both governments’ hard-liners need each other to remain in power.

The Iranian people, 85 million of them, majority under 35, highly educated, and overwhelmingly wanting engagement with the world, are trapped between a government that treats them as subjects and an international sanctions regime that punishes them for their government’s choices. The American people, meanwhile, continue paying for a foreign policy architecture that serves arms manufacturers, defense contractors, and geopolitical abstractions more than it serves democratic values or human security.

Some Uncomfortable Truths

The United States is not the villain of every story, nor is Iran irredeemably authoritarian in the hearts of its people. What is consistent, and what this analysis has documented, is that both governments operate by standards they refuse to apply to themselves.

Tehran’s theocratic governance has failed its population economically, politically, and most visibly in its treatment of women and dissidents. The Woman, Life, Freedom movement showed the world what Iranian society wants. The government’s violent response showed the world what the Islamic Republic fears.

The lesson, uncomfortable as it is, is that powerful states, whether wielding aircraft carriers or theology, tend to exempt themselves from the rules they want others to follow. The only antidote is an informed public that refuses to accept these double standards as the natural order of things. Read critically. Follow the money. And remember: when a government tells you it acts in the name of God or democracy.

(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT, Malabe. The views and opinions expressed in this article are personal.)

Opinion

SLC Grants to clubs and associations under scrutiny

Published

18 hours ago

2026/03/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

The scale and manner of grant distributions underscore the urgent need to rectify the weaknesses identified by the Auditor General. Remarkably, the accounts for the years 2024 and 2025 are still not published and only the 2023 accounts are available for public scrutiny.

Grants to clubs and associations increased from LKR 1.30 billion in the prior year to LKR 2.46 billion in 2023, representing an escalation of over LKR 1.15 billion year-on-year. These grants were distributed among 36 recipient clubs and associations, with individual allocations ranging from approximately LKR 1.5 million to almost LKR 300 million. Such wide variation and substantial growth warrant clear public disclosure of the allocation framework, the approval processes, and the beneficiary criteria.

While it is understandable that higher profitability enables greater financial support to clubs, the absence of a transparent, rule-based grant policy gives rise to governance concerns, and unless properly explained, leaves room for malicious or unfounded allegations that grant allocations may be used to influence voting behaviour or entrench existing officials. Robust disclosure and effective oversight are therefore essential to safeguard institutional credibility. The precise immediate need for high funding and their monitoring processes need to be divulged.

A case in point is Colombo Cricket Club (CCC), which received LKR 279,531,827 in 2023, making it the highest individual club recipient. As disclosed under the related-party notes to the financial statements, the President of Sri Lanka Cricket is also the President of Colombo Cricket Club, resulting in this transaction being classified as a related-party transaction.

In contrast to several grant recipient entities reporting profits, Sri Lanka Cricket recorded a deficit of approximately Rs. 2 billion in its Statement of Financial Performance for 2023.

It is also noteworthy from the cash flow statement that cash and fund balances declined sharply, from approximately LKR 10.8 billion in the previous year to around LKR 5.6 billion in 2023, representing a significant depletion of liquid resources within a single financial year.

A more meaningful and complete evaluation of these developments—particularly the position of funds available as at 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2025—will only be possible once the financial statements for 2024 and 2025 are released and subjected to public scrutiny.

A cricket enthusiast – Moratuwa

Opinion

Microfinance and Credit Regulatory Authority Act 2026 fails all affacted communities

Published

2 days ago

2026/03/10

Sahan Weerasooriya

A protest against exploitation by microfinance companies

The Microfinance and Credit Regulatory Authority Bill was passed into law by the Parliament of Sri Lanka on 4 March. According to Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning Dr. Anil Jayantha, the main object of the Act is to establish an Authority to “license and supervise the under-regulated microfinance and moneylending sector, aiming to protect borrowers from exploitation and ensure financial stability”.

However, the Yukthi Collective is saddened and disappointed that a government which pledged to take “measures to alleviate the burden of predatory microfinance loans with high interest rates on women” (NPP Manifesto, 2024: Page no. 44), will now add to their unbearable weight.

The new Act, as virtually all legislation enacted by Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s government, is a legacy of the anti-working class Ranil Wickremesinghe regime. It evades the root causes of the microfinance trap, and ignores debt justice for women borrowers.

It fails in understanding the connections between household debt and public debt. The vicious cycle of national debt is sustained by lack of growth in economic activity because of poor access to affordable credit.

It fails to make equal representation of women mandatory in the new Authority. If representatives of women borrowers and their self-run organisations are not present in the regulatory body, how will its members know of their lived experiences and make decisions that value women’s unpaid and paid contributions to sustaining life?

System Change

Millions of indebted households voted for the NPP with hope and expectation of ‘system change’. But instead of honouring its manifesto promise to them, the government has let them down in the law-making process; as well as the focus and substance of the new Act.

It is appalling that NPP parliamentarians, including some of its women members, appear not to have read and understood the bill they enacted into law, nor spoke to the rural credit community providers in their electorates for their views.

Predatory lending exists in the formal and informal sectors. Within this ecosystem, the Act fails to understand, identify, and prohibit predatory lending and recovery practices. It is a cover for the Central Bank’s failure to properly regulate ‘Licensed Finance Companies’ in the interests of citizens.

The biggest offenders are the big finance companies, in which some parliamentarians are deposit-holders. Therefore, some lawmakers benefit from excess profitmaking through exploitative practices, at the expense of poor mostly rural women.

Where law reform should discipline the bullies and thugs in credit delivery, it will instead wipe out, through over-regulation, community-based and managed lenders such as death donation societies, farmer associations, and urban and rural women’s collectives, which have been a lifeline for vulnerable working-class women and a defence from harmful recovery practices.

Structural Adjustment Programmes

The motivation for this new law are the market- and capital- friendly structural reforms insisted by International Financial Institutions; not the concerns and needs of those at the mercy of predatory lenders.

From the Microfinance Act 2016, to the 2023 version of the Ranil Wickremesinghe regime, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) through its loans has been a promoter of these regressive reforms.

The 2026 Act, with some changes suggested by the Supreme Court in 2024 and hardly any of the changes demanded by affected communities, has been moved forward by the NPP government in line with ADB loan conditionalities.

The path of de-regulation for banking, finance, trade, and investment; and over-regulation of poor people’s savings and credit institutions, smacks of the bias to big capital, which the NPP in opposition once criticised.

Reforms needed

The financial and banking reforms we want to see are to make credit from state banks and public funds accessible and affordable to women producers in agriculture and micro and small business operators; with decent wages and social protection for workers; that improve household opportunity for a dignified livelihood and decent lives.

Yukthi is a forum supporting working people’s movements and people’s struggles for democracy and justice in Sri Lanka.

by Yukthi Collective