Former Presidents are scheming to regain power after defeat: Justice Minister

11-Sep-2025

.

Justice and National Unity Minister Harsha Nanayakkara told Parliament that unlike in other countries where retired presidents dedicate themselves to national development and social welfare, Sri Lanka’s former presidents misuse public funds to build mansions for their children and plot to return to power from the very day of their defeat.

Speaking after presenting the Presidential Entitlements (Repeal) Bill for its second reading on September 10, he stated:

“This bill seeks to repeal the Presidential Entitlements Act No. 4 of 1986. In a judgment delivered by Chief Justice Weeramanthri, it was held that the government or president must exercise executive power as trustees of the people, not as owners. That authority must always serve the public interest.

In our election manifesto, we declared that we do not want privileges denied to the people. All must be equal before the law. We too are only temporary custodians of power.

President J.R. Jayewardene introduced the 1986 Act solely for his personal comfort after retirement, to live in luxury at public expense. This Act is not part of the Constitution. Retirement benefits are provided for under Article 36 of the Constitution. Future constitutional amendments may reconsider such allowances.

The bill now presented concerns the official residences granted to former presidents. This is not opposed by the people, but only by those who wish to misuse state resources even after retirement. They have repeatedly abused the law to enrich themselves and their associates at the people’s expense.

We promised to eliminate unnecessary expenditure, and the people accepted it. For instance, in 2005, former President Chandrika Kumaratunga allocated to herself a plot of land at Mattegoda to build a residence. The Supreme Court later held this to be illegal.

Similarly, before retirement, former President Maithripala Sirisena used the Act to allocate to himself an official residence and additional security meant for a retired Chief Justice. The Supreme Court rejected this improper claim.

Former presidents have misused this Act to enrich themselves while burdening the public treasury. If allowed to continue, this will drain the people dry. Amid economic hardship, why should public funds be squandered on them?

While other nations’ retired presidents contribute to society beyond politics, ours waste taxpayer money on mansions and plots for power. Is it fair for the public to continue supporting them? Sons who wear shoes worth half a million rupees should take care of their parents instead. People struggling economically should not be forced to maintain them.”