A shocking audit report has revealed widespread irregularities and misuse in Sri Lanka’s ‘Api Wenuwen Api’ housing fund meant to support war heroes. From missing application forms to benefits given to unqualified high-ranking officers and abandoned houses, the audit exposes a deeply flawed system that ignored disabled veterans and the families of the fallen.
An explosive audit report has uncovered serious irregularities in the use of the ‘Api Wenuwen Api’ fund set up in 2008 through public donations to provide housing aid to members of Sri Lanka’s armed forces and police who served during the civil war.
This fund, intended to support those who joined before May 18, 2009, has come under fire for distributing benefits without proper procedure, failing to prioritize those in greatest need, and lacking transparency. The audit report DEF/C/ADA/06/22/PA/08, issued by the National Audit Office, raises serious accountability concerns regarding how benefits were managed from 2020 to 2022.
Incomplete and Unverified Files
The report reveals glaring gaps in documentation and eligibility screening. As per Ministry of Defence instructions in September 2020, all applicants were to submit original forms and verified supporting documents. Yet, the audit found that out of 61 sample files, 3 had no application forms and 18 lacked any official recommendations.
Even more troubling, several files had no records of interviews or evaluation criteria used to determine eligibility. For instance, a beneficiary identified as O/62249 received the full Rs. 1.5 million housing grant in 2021 without a single valid document on file only an uncertified land plan and no application form.
Worse, some houses that received support under this fund were found to be abandoned.
Unqualified High-Ranking Officers Received Benefits
The partial benefit of Rs. 750,000 was supposed to be reserved for Army Majors or below, with priority to non-commissioned officers. However, the audit found that three senior officers above this rank were granted these benefits violating policy.
Benefits Given Outside Official Records
The audit also exposed how 127 recipients in 2020 received benefits despite not appearing on the official list for that year. An additional 23 beneficiaries were not listed on any approved document at all, and 22 of them were in-service personnel classified under the lowest priority.
The most concerning aspect is that these individuals were granted benefits without interviews or verification, while 25 disabled, retired, or deceased military personnel recommended by the Ranaviru Services Directorate were denied aid simply because they were not interviewed.
In many instances, benefits were awarded to individuals not appearing on authorized lists, and selection often prioritized seniority over actual need subverting the intended purpose of the fund.
Failure to Account for the Most Vulnerable
Perhaps most damning is the fund’s lack of data on soldiers who were killed, disabled, or went missing during service. Despite other Defence Ministry agencies holding this data, the ‘Api Wenuwen Api’ fund has not utilized it, leading to incomplete beneficiary records.
Between 2017 and 2023, over 1,553 eligible military personnel remained on the waiting list, yet the fund’s management failed to give them priority in the distribution of aid.
Furthermore, the audit revealed that military personnel had limited awareness of overlapping housing programs run by different entities like the Ranaviru Seva Authority and the National Defence Fund leading many deserving individuals to miss out.
Audit Recommendations Call for Transparency and Reform
The audit urges the Ministry of Defence to implement a transparent and independent system to distribute housing benefits. This includes publicly calling for applications, holding eligibility interviews, and using objective criteria for final selection.
The report specifically recommends prioritizing deceased, disabled, and retired military personnel in urgent need of housing and suggests creating a centralized database, organized through Divisional Secretariats, to track potential beneficiaries more effectively.
Moreover, it demands that all monitoring activities which have so far been conducted informally be brought under formal, regulated supervision to ensure accountability.
