TISL asks Cabinet to revoke President's retirement benefits

Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) has called on the Cabinet of Ministers to immediately revoke any Cabinet decision on the retirement benefits of President Maithripala Sirisena.

The TISL statement was issued over a decision made by the Cabinet of Ministers, allowing the President to remain in his official residence at Mahagama Sekara Mawatha in Colombo after his retirement.

TISL Executive Director Asoka Obeyesekere has said a conservative estimate could place the benefit afforded to President Sirisena, as a result of retaining the official residence, at over Rs.360 million over a 20-year period.

“As this decision has been made by the cabinet of ministers led by President Sirisena the conflict of interest is deeply concerning and illustrates little consideration for the protection of public resources,” Obeyesekere pointed out.

TISL is firmly of the stance that decisions pertaining to such entitlements should only be taken at such time that the sitting President ceases to hold office.

Furthermore, the fact that the decision was made during an election period where the President has declared that he will remain impartial despite his party’s decision to support a candidate, also raises several red flags on electoral integrity and potential corruption under the Bribery Act, TISL has stated.

TISL believes that the timing of the decision when the President is still in office and is the Head of Cabinet raises serious questions regarding conflicts of interest. This is underscored by the decision of the Supreme Court in 2007 regarding the premature exercise of executive power under the Presidents Entitlements Act of 1986.

Whilst former Presidents and their widows/widowers are entitled to an official residence as per the provisions of the Presidents Entitlements Act 1986, TISL has drawn attention to a 2007 judgment of the Supreme Court.

In a fundamental rights application to the Supreme Court (SC FR503/2005) a three-judge bench ruled in favour of the petitioners, quashing the Cabinet decisions on grants and entitlements to President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, whilst the President was in office.

In its judgement the court has noted, “The facts that have been clearly established in this case prove that the 1st respondent and the Cabinet of Ministers of which she was the head, secured for the 1st respondent benefits and advantages in the purported exercise of executive power in breach of the provisions of the President’s Entitlement Act No. 4 of 1986.”