Parliament erupts as opposition alleges political interference halted a Bribery Commission indictment against the Energy Minister, triggering fierce denials and calls for accountability.
Sri Lanka’s Parliament was thrust into controversy after Samagi Jana Balawegaya MP Ajith Perera alleged that political pressure blocked the Bribery or Corruption Investigation Commission from filing indictments against Power and Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody. The accusation has intensified debate over political interference, corruption investigations, and governance standards within key economic ministries.
Participating in a parliamentary debate, MP Perera stated that the Bribery Commission had completed an investigation into alleged corruption linked to a fertilizer tender during the period when Kumara Jayakody served as tender manager of the Fertilizer Corporation. According to Perera, investigators had reached a decision to file indictments. However, he claimed that the move was halted due to the influence of the current political leadership, preventing the case from proceeding through the legal process.
The opposition MP further alleged that Kumara Jayakody had previously lost his position due to the tender controversy. He stated that the minister had challenged the decision in court but was unsuccessful, arguing that the judicial outcome reflected the seriousness of the findings. These claims have added a legal dimension to what is already a politically charged dispute.
Perera also stressed that President Anura Kumara Dissanayake bears responsibility for appointing an individual facing such serious allegations to head the Energy Ministry, a portfolio overseeing a significant share of Sri Lanka’s economy. He questioned whether public trust in anti corruption measures can be sustained if unresolved investigations remain clouded by claims of political protection.
Responding to the allegations, Minister Kumara Jayakody rejected the accusations as politically motivated. He said the opposition was spreading false claims and insisted that he had not been dismissed from service but had resigned voluntarily. The minister challenged his critics to provide evidence supporting their assertions.
In reply, MP Ajith Perera maintained that he was presenting the matter responsibly as a senior lawyer with thirty three years of experience. He urged the minister to directly address the allegations of corruption rather than dismiss them, signaling that the controversy is far from settled.
