On Wednesday, Sri Lanka’s first passenger drone taxi lifted off at the Colombo Port City carrying two Ministers, and for three minutes the country seemed to be keeping pace with the future. Yet by the time the aircraft settled back on the ground, the story had changed entirely. Instead of a milestone in aviation, the public was handed a different spectacle: two arms of the State arguing in front of a foreign investor over who had the right to say yes.
The facts, as reported, are straightforward enough. Civil Aviation Minister Aruna Karunathilaka and Deputy Minister Janitha Ruwan Kodithuwakku took the inaugural flight aboard an EHang E216, a fully autonomous, Chinese-built electric aircraft. The Civil Aviation Authority of Sri Lanka (CAASL) insists that every necessary approval had been secured, including clearance from the Ministry of Defence and the Sri Lanka Air Force. The Port City Economic Commission, however, questioned whether its own permission had been sought, and a reported confrontation between a Commission official and the project team disrupted the planned three test flights. Even the intervention of Minister Prof Anil Jayantha Fernando failed to break the deadlock.
It would be easy to dismiss this as a squabble over paperwork. Nevertheless, it exposes a weakness that runs far deeper than a single demonstration.
To begin with, the question of jurisdiction should never have arisen on the day. The trial was not sprung on anyone. It followed a special discussion at the Civil Aviation Ministry in August, and preliminary technical assessments were carried out in advance, with the operating area deliberately located within the Port City. In other words, there was ample time for the institutions concerned to agree on who needed to sign what. That they evidently did not is a failure of basic coordination, and no explanation after the event alters that.
Secondly, the substance of the dispute matters. As a senior Government official reportedly observed, control of the land at Port City does not automatically confer control of the air above it. That is surely correct. Airspace is a matter of sovereignty and safety, falling squarely within the remit of the aviation regulator and the security establishment. If the Port City Economic Commission believes its mandate extends into the sky, it should say so plainly and cite the law that grants it. Equally, if the CAASL believes the Commission has no such role, it ought to have made that clear long before two Ministers climbed aboard. Either way, the ambiguity is the real problem, and ambiguity is exactly what investors fear most.
This brings us to the third and perhaps most damaging point. The Chinese investor behind the project is understood to have expressed disappointment at the obstacles it encountered. Such disappointment travels. Sri Lanka has spent years marketing the Port City as a zone where doing business is simpler, faster and more predictable. Yet here was a showcase project, already certified by China’s aviation authority and assessed by our own regulator, tripping over a question as elementary as whose permission was required. Few investors watching from afar will conclude that the country is ready for emerging technologies.
That would be a pity, because the potential here is genuine. According to its manufacturer, the EHang system has more than 100,000 test flights behind it, and it is understood to be among the first autonomous passenger eVTOL aircraft to receive type certification. It’s possible uses range from tourism, with talk of flights to Sigiriya, Pidurangala and our island attractions, to emergency services, where speed can save lives. Moreover, the CAASL appears to have done its homework, building its standards on the Chinese certification framework and insisting on proper registration, airworthiness and operational approvals.
What is needed now, therefore, is not finger-pointing but clarity. The Government should establish, in writing and without delay, which institution holds authority over the airspace above the Port City and how future approvals will be coordinated. A single point of contact for investors, backed by a clear protocol between the CAASL, the Commission and the security agencies, would go a long way. After all, the trial is expected to run for around six months, and it cannot lurch from one standoff to the next.
Ultimately, the drone flew and landed safely. The machinery of the State, on the other hand, did not. If Sri Lanka wants to be taken seriously as a home for new technology, it must first prove that its own institutions can agree on who is in charge.