By Ceylon Signal 
Colombo, 24 August 2026 — Election monitoring body Paffrel has raised serious concerns over the proposed Anti‑Corruption (Amendment) Bill, warning that several provisions undermine public access to information, weaken transparency safeguards, and concentrate excessive authority in the hands of a single official within the Bribery or Corruption Commission.
In a detailed letter addressed to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Paffrel Executive Director Rohana Hettiarachchi cautioned that while the 2023 Anti‑Corruption Act marked a historic step toward accountability, the new amendment risks reversing key gains made in Sri Lanka’s anti‑corruption framework.
Public Access to Asset Declarations Under Threat
Hettiarachchi notes that the 2023 Act’s decision to grant public access to asset and liability declarations was a “turning point” in Sri Lanka’s transparency efforts. However, the new amendment—gazetted on 24 July 2026—introduces a clause prohibiting the use of such information for any purpose other than submitting it to an authorised officer.
Paffrel argues that this restriction criminalises the public’s use of information that the law itself makes accessible, creating a chilling effect on journalists, civil society organisations, and citizens who rely on these declarations to identify inconsistencies and potential wrongdoing.
The organisation also warns that the term “edited copy” remains undefined, raising fears that authorities could withhold information under the guise of protecting privacy.
Concerns Over Reduced Disclosure Requirements
The amendment proposes raising the threshold for mandatory asset declarations from institutions with 25% state ownership to 50%. Paffrel says this change removes nearly half of state‑linked institutions from disclosure requirements, contradicting the core purpose of the anti‑corruption law.
“This is regrettable,” the letter states, arguing that the change weakens oversight of entities that manage public resources.
Risk of Concealing Assets Through Associates
Another key concern is the removal of the requirement to disclose assets belonging to individuals who have lived with the declarant for at least six months. Paffrel warns that this creates an easy loophole for concealing assets under the names of close associates.
“This clause should be strengthened, not removed,” Hettiarachchi writes, noting that individuals could now place assets under the names of partners or associates to avoid scrutiny.
Power Concentrated in One Individual
Paffrel also highlights provisions that appear to centralise decision‑making authority within the office of the Director General of CIABOC. While expressing confidence in the current DG, Hettiarachchi stresses that “concentrating power in one person is not a positive trend” and contradicts the principles of an independent commission.
“In an independent commission, authority should rest with the commission or a structured mechanism—not with an individual,” the letter states.
Positive Elements Acknowledged, But Core Rights Must Be Protected
Despite its criticisms, Paffrel acknowledges that the amendment contains several positive reforms, including expanded coverage and clarification of ambiguities in the existing law. However, the organisation insists that no amendment should weaken the public’s right to hold power to account.
Call for Public Consultation
Paffrel urges President Dissanayake to ensure that the amendment undergoes broad public consultation and reflects the aspirations of citizens who fought for stronger anti‑corruption protections.
“We respectfully request Your Excellency to ensure that, in building a disciplined nation, a culture is established where those who hold power are accountable, and where the rights to access and share information are protected,” the letter concludes.