Sri Lanka has decided that the best way to fight corruption is to… create another unit. This time, they’re called Internal Affairs Units, and the Government says 250 state institutions have been instructed to set them up. The theory is familiar and not inherently wrong: if citizens have a clear channel to report misconduct, and if institutions are forced to track complaints and outcomes, then the old culture of “just tolerate it” begins to crack.

The President’s Media Division’s framing—accountability, ethics, oversight—sounds like music to a public that has paid the bill for corruption for decades. But Sri Lankans are right to ask the uncomfortable question: is this architecture… or theatre? The difference is simple. Architecture produces consequences. Theatre produces press releases.

According to reports, internal affairs units already exist in 106 state bodies, and officials say trained officers are part of the model. The expansion is meant to scale that approach—standardise reporting lines, encourage whistleblowing, and “build public trust.” That last phrase matters. Trust is not restored by slogans; it is restored by explaining what happens after a complaint is lodged— who investigates, what timelines apply, and whether outcomes are published or quietly buried under “disciplinary procedures.”

Here’s the pro-people test: will a citizen who reports a bribe solicitation at a local office be protected, or exposed? Will the complaint lead to action, or retaliation? Will internal affairs be independent enough to bite the hand that signs their overtime sheets?

Because Sri Lanka already has a talent for creating “units” that become institutional wallpaper—present, funded, and politely ignored. If these new units merely collect complaints and pass them up the line to the same seniority structures that protected misconduct in the first place, we’ve built a funnel, not a solution.

But if the government is serious, it can do three things quickly: publish performance data (complaints received, resolved, pending); protect whistleblowers; and enforce timelines that cannot be massaged into oblivion.

Sri Lankans don’t need more bureaucracy. They need less corruption. This initiative will be judged not by the number “250,” but by the first handful of officials who actually face consequences.