Parliament has yet to answer a Right to Information (RTI) request seeking details of expenditure and resources provided to three Speakers, nearly five months after it was submitted, with officials giving conflicting explanations over why the information remains undisclosed.
Officials of Parliament’s RTI Division have given differing explanations for the delay, with the latest being that the Finance Division is unable to provide the information in the form requested.
The RTI request was submitted by The Daily Morning on 19 March and registered under reference number P/I/26/0035. It sought information on expenditure and resources provided to Speakers Mahinda Yapa Abeywardana, Asoka Sapumal Ranwala and Dr Wickramaratne during their respective periods in office.
The information sought included expenditure incurred by the Speaker’s Office; vehicles allocated to each Speaker; the number and designations of attached staff; the approved cadre; fuel allowances; salaries, allowances and other payments; foreign visits and related expenditure; official residences and maintenance costs; and other Government resources used by the Speakers and their monthly expenditure.
Parliament’s RTI Division acknowledged the request on 23 March. On 24 April, the requester was informed that a further 21 days had been granted due to the volume of information and the time required to locate it.
No response was provided after the extended period. Following several telephone inquiries, the requester was initially told that the request had been sent to the Finance Division. The Finance Division Director later informed the requester that the answers had been finalised and forwarded to the RTI Division. He was subsequently told that the RTI Officer was overseas and the response would be issued after his return.
After further inquiries, the requester was told that the response had been forwarded to the Speaker’s Office and would be released after the Speaker’s approval.
The explanation later changed. The requester was informed that Dr Wickramaratne had requested amendments to the answers and that the response had therefore been returned to the Finance Division. An RTI Division officer confirmed this on 3 August, saying the Finance Division’s amended response was pending.
However, when contacted again yesterday (17), an officer gave a different explanation, saying Parliament did not have the information in the form requested because of the volume of information. The officer also said the relevant Division had no separate Information Officer and that officials handled RTI requests alongside their regular duties.
The requester has appealed to Parliament’s Designated Officer under the RTI Act, pointing out the differing explanations and requesting that the information be released without further delay. He said nearly five months had passed without receiving either the requested information or a formal written decision identifying information that could not be disclosed and the legal basis for withholding it.
Multiple attempts to contact the Speaker’s Office and Finance Division proved futile.
The delay comes amid a complaint lodged with the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption by Parliament’s Deputy Secretary General, attorney Chaminda Kularatne, against Dr Wickramaratne. The complaint alleges that Dr Wickramaratne sought to prevent the disclosure of information concerning the alleged misuse of public funds and resources and activities that may have caused financial loss to the Government.
It further alleges that such conduct amounts to “corruption” under the Anti-Corruption Act, No. 9 of 2023.
Kularatne claimed that civil society activists had sought information on the Speaker’s personal staff, Media Unit, equipment provided to the Unit, salaries and allowances, and official vehicles, but that Dr Wickramaratne and/or his Private Secretary had instructed Parliament’s Information Officers not to release such information, citing provisions of the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act, No. 21 of 1953.
The complaint stated that the Act covers Parliament’s legislative functions and does not cover administrative matters concerning the Speaker. It also referred to several RTI application files submitted to Parliament, which it said could be examined to establish the relevant circumstances.