Sri Lanka's National People's Power (NPP) government is facing sharp criticism from anti-corruption advocates after proposing amendments that would significantly limit public access to asset and liability declarations made by public officials. Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) has issued a strong warning, urging the government to immediately withdraw the proposed changes, which critics say would gut one of the most meaningful transparency reforms introduced in recent years. The move has raised serious questions about the NPP's commitment to the anti-corruption agenda it championed during its rise to power.
What Are Asset and Liability Declarations?
Asset and liability declarations are a cornerstone of modern anti-corruption frameworks. Under the Anti-Corruption Act, No. 9 of 2023, individuals entrusted with public power are legally required to disclose their assets, liabilities, and financial interests. The purpose is straightforward: to ensure that those who hold public office remain accountable to the citizens they serve, and to deter the accumulation of illicit wealth through the abuse of power.
These declarations are not merely bureaucratic formalities. When accessible to the public, they serve as a powerful deterrent against corruption, enabling civil society organizations, journalists, and ordinary citizens to scrutinize the financial conduct of elected officials and public servants. The transparency they provide is widely regarded as an essential tool in the global fight against corruption and the misuse of public resources.
The Proposed Amendments and Their Impact
The proposed amendments put forward by the NPP government would dramatically restrict who can access these declarations and under what circumstances. If passed, the changes would effectively close the door on meaningful public scrutiny, limiting access in ways that undermine the original intent of the Anti-Corruption Act. Rather than strengthening the existing framework, the amendments represent a significant step backward in Sri Lanka's anti-corruption journey.
TISL has been unequivocal in its assessment. The organization argues that restricting public access to asset declarations removes one of the most effective checks on the behavior of public officials. Without the ability for civil society and the media to independently verify and analyze these disclosures, the declarations risk becoming little more than confidential paperwork — filed away and forgotten, with no real accountability mechanism attached to them.
TISL's Strong Response
Transparency International Sri Lanka has called on the government to reconsider its position urgently. In a formal statement, TISL emphasized that public access to asset declarations is not a privilege — it is a fundamental component of democratic governance and a prerequisite for genuine accountability. The organization stressed that any amendment weakening this access would be a direct contradiction of the principles enshrined in the Anti-Corruption Act itself.
TISL further noted that Sri Lanka's adoption of the Anti-Corruption Act in 2023 was a landmark moment, reflecting a national commitment to rooting out corruption at all levels of government. To now propose amendments that undermine one of the Act's most vital provisions sends a troubling signal, both domestically and to the international community. Sri Lanka has been working to rebuild trust with foreign investors and multilateral institutions, and rolling back transparency measures could jeopardize those efforts.
A Betrayal of Voter Trust?
The NPP government swept to power on a platform built heavily around promises of good governance, transparency, and systemic reform. Voters who supported the party did so with the expectation that it would strengthen, not weaken, the institutions designed to hold power to account. The proposed amendments have therefore sparked not just legal and institutional concern, but a deeper sense of political disappointment among supporters who believed the NPP represented a genuine break from Sri Lanka's long history of political corruption.
Critics argue that restricting public access to asset declarations is precisely the kind of move that entrenched political elites have historically made to protect themselves from scrutiny. For a government that built its identity around fighting that very culture, the optics are damaging and the contradictions difficult to ignore.
The Broader Implications for Governance
Beyond the immediate political controversy, the proposed amendments carry serious long-term implications for the quality of governance in Sri Lanka. Transparency and accountability are not abstract ideals — they have direct consequences for how public resources are managed, how policy decisions are made, and whether citizens can trust the institutions that govern their lives.
When public officials know their financial declarations are subject to independent scrutiny, they are far less likely to engage in corrupt behavior. Conversely, when that scrutiny is removed, the conditions for corruption become significantly more favorable. The stakes, therefore, extend well beyond any single political party or government term.
What Happens Next?
Civil society groups, legal experts, and opposition voices are now calling for broader public debate before any amendments are passed into law. TISL has urged the government to engage transparently with stakeholders and to reaffirm its commitment to the Anti-Corruption Act in both letter and spirit. The coming weeks will be a critical test of whether the NPP government chooses accountability over convenience — and whether Sri Lanka's hard-won transparency reforms will be allowed to stand.