Rebuilding Sri Lanka fund dispute deepens as Harsha de Silva questions its legal status while govt insists Rs. 9,583 million remains safe.
The Rebuilding Sri Lanka fund has become the center of a political and legal controversy, with conflicting claims from opposition MP Harsha de Silva and Deputy Finance Minister Anil Jayantha Fernando raising questions about its existence and management.
Samagi Jana Balawegaya Member of Parliament Harsha de Silva has stated that there is no formally established fund named “Rebuilding Sri Lanka,” challenging the legal basis of the fund currently cited by the government.
In a post on X, the MP disputed recent assurances by Deputy Minister Anil Jayantha Fernando that the fund exists safely. He argued that in a legal sense, no such fund has been created under an Act of Parliament.
Harsha de Silva further pointed out that under Sri Lanka’s program with the International Monetary Fund, several funds have already been abolished, with only statutory funds established through legislation permitted to operate.
He noted that despite repeatedly raising the issue with the government, officials had responded by saying they were “working on it,” suggesting that the fund has not yet been formally established within the legal framework.
“Therefore, there is no such fund,” he stated, emphasizing that while the government claims money has been deposited into the Rebuilding Sri Lanka fund, there is no legally recognized entity supporting that claim.
However, Deputy Minister Anil Jayantha Fernando has offered a contrasting position. Speaking to the media on Monday, he stated that as of April 24, 2026, a total of Rs. 9,583 million had been deposited into the fund.
He added that the fund was established to support communities affected by Cyclone Ditwa and insisted that there is no threat to the money received.
The Deputy Minister also highlighted that although Rs. 500 billion had been allocated through a supplementary estimate for post-Ditwa recovery, a significant portion of those funds remains unused. As a result, funds from the Rebuilding Sri Lanka initiative are being utilized as required.
He further stated that while some individuals have questioned whether the money has been misused, detailed financial information will be provided after the close of the financial year.
Addressing broader allegations, Anil Jayantha Fernando accused opposition politicians of spreading false information with narrow political motives, particularly in relation to claims involving $2.5 million.
He confirmed that an investigation into that incident is currently underway and assured that the public will be updated as inquiries progress.
However, questions remain about the legal standing of the fund itself. If funds are being collected and utilized without a formal statutory framework, it raises concerns about oversight, accountability, and compliance with IMF-related reforms.
What happens next could be critical. As the government prepares to release further details, the debate over whether the Rebuilding Sri Lanka fund exists in law or only in practice is likely to intensify, shaping public trust in financial governance.
