A fierce political clash erupts as the Police reject allegations of a hidden approval system for police reports, while Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa accuses the government of quietly creating a dangerous gateway to control citizens, raising urgent questions about transparency, power and public rights.
The Sri Lanka Police released a detailed public statement addressing widespread media reports claiming that applicants seeking police reports must now obtain a character certificate from the Chairman of the Community Police Committee in their Grama Niladhari Division. According to the Police Media Division, these reports are entirely false and have misled the public. Officials insist that the existing process for obtaining police clearance has not been changed in any way.
The Police clarified that the official procedure for securing a police report required for local employment or travel to Middle Eastern countries involves submitting a request letter, a Grama Niladhari certificate, and a National Identity Card to the police station of residence. After receiving these documents, officers at the respective police station must conduct proper investigations and issue the report without delay. This remains the recognized method used across the island.
For police clearance reports needed for overseas employment, education, or long term residence in countries outside the Middle East, applicants are required to upload scanned copies of their documents via the official online police portal. Following verification and a background check, the clearance report is released. The Police emphasized that at no stage in either process is a character certificate from a Community Police Committee Chairman required. The institution insists that the circulating news is inaccurate. Authorities further warned that corrective action will be taken against parties responsible for publishing misleading information that could cause public confusion.
However, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa presented a sharply contrasting position inside Parliament. He claimed that several police stations are indeed instructing applicants to obtain character certificates from Community Police Committee chairpersons before issuing police reports. He argued that this creates a parallel approval mechanism that contradicts the Police Minister’s assurances that no such requirement exists.
He questioned whether this emerging practice signals the beginning of a dictatorship or a police state, especially if community level committee chairpersons, who may have political ties, gain influence over police documentation and public rights. Sajith stated that the move could centralize power in ways that threaten democratic processes, accountability, and equal access to state services.
To support his claims, he presented two documented cases. In Kumbhalgoda under the Kirindi Puhul Division in Matara, an applicant who requested a police report from the Hakmana Police Station for private sector employment was told to obtain a character certificate from the Chairman of the Community Police Committee in addition to the Grama Niladhari report. After submitting the certificate, the applicant finally received his police report.
In Lenapatuwa under the Kamburupitiya Police Division, another applicant was similarly asked to provide a certificate from the Community Police Committee Chairman, who is also the local NPP Chairman. Although the applicant submitted the certificate, he has still not received his police report.
Sajith warned that such practices may lead to political monopolies within rural community structures. He urged the government to acknowledge public concerns rather than ignore them when issues are raised in Parliament.
