Treasury heist report controversy grows as Harsha de Silva rejects a Finance Ministry document sent to his private residence.
The Treasury heist report sought by the Committee on Public Finance has triggered a fresh controversy after MP Dr. Harsha de Silva rejected its delivery to his private residence.
Dr. Harsha de Silva, who chairs the COPF, voiced strong opposition to the decision to send the report requested by the Committee regarding the diversion of US$ 2.5 million from the Treasury to another party, directly to his home.
The MP revealed that the Secretary to the Ministry of Finance had sent the report to his private residence, stating that it was intended only for the personal perusal of the Chairman.
The Ministry of Finance had earlier agreed to provide a report containing all details relating to the transaction. The Ministry had been given four weeks to submit the report, although there had been some delay in handing it over.
Dr. de Silva stressed that he represents the people not in his personal capacity as Harsha de Silva, but as the Chairman of the Committee on Public Finance.
He emphasized that the report was requested for discussion within the Committee, not for his private use.
“I refused to accept that report being sent to me personally and to my home. I did not accept it,” he said.
The MP stated that the report should have been sent through Parliament, following the proper institutional protocol.
The COPF Chairman further noted that the full authority and oversight responsibility over public finance lies with Parliament. The Committee on Public Finance has been appointed to carry out that responsibility on behalf of Parliament and the people.
He warned that attempting to send reports privately in this manner undermines democracy and amounts to an attempt to take over, weaken, or bypass the responsibility of the COPF.
Following the consensus of all Committee members, Dr. Harsha de Silva has ordered that the relevant report be submitted formally to Parliament by tomorrow, the 3rd.
Once the report is submitted through the proper channel, Committee members are expected to study it. The matter is then scheduled to be taken up for discussion in the coming days.
The dispute has now raised wider questions about transparency, parliamentary oversight, and the proper handling of sensitive reports linked to public finance and Treasury transactions.
