Solution Brief: Independence in Name Only - Lessons from Sri Lanka's 2023 Election Crisis

In early 2023, the Election Commission of Sri Lanka (ECSL) commenced the local government election process by issuing the necessary gazette and accepting nominations. This triggered a constitutional obligation on the state to facilitate the exercise of the franchise, a fundamental right consistently recognised by the Supreme Court, closely linked to freedom of expression under Article 14(1)(a).

Despite this, the Ministry of Finance, under the President's direction, issued a memorandum [1] stating that funds would be prioritised for essential public services, a category that conspicuously excluded the conduct of elections. The executive justified this on the basis of Sri Lanka's severe economic crisis and its IMF arrangement. However, in the landmark case of Bandara v Siriwardana (SC/FR 69/2023) [2], the Supreme Court held that this justification was legally inadequate and constitutionally invalid.

The 2023 crisis exposed a critical vulnerability: independent commissions can be financially starved by the very executive they are meant to operate independently of.

Even where commissioners are appointed through an independent process, their operational budgets remain ‘voted’ items negotiated annually with the Ministry of Finance. As the Information Commissioner of Canada has described in a similar context, this forces a watchdog to go ’cap-in-hand' to the very government it oversees. This fundamentally undermines its independence.

This solution brief outlines lessons from New Zealand and South Africa and what needs to change in Sri Lanka when establishing independence commissions to ensure their independence and efficiency.

SolutionBrief_Arutha_ECSLpdf.pdf

Download PDF • 1.45MB