Kularatne Complains to Bribery Commision
A controversy involving Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne has taken a more consequential turn with the suspension of Parliament’s Deputy Secretary General and Chief of Staff, Chaminda Kularatne—a development that has prompted concern across party lines and sharpened attention on questions of process, authority, and institutional balance.
Mr. Kularatne has been suspended with effect from 23 January, following a preliminary inquiry conducted on the Speaker’s instructions by former senior public servant S. K. Liyanage. The inquiry concluded that Mr. Kularatne did not possess the minimum number of years of permanent public service experience required for appointment to the post he currently holds.
The letter of suspension alleges that Mr. Kularatne had misled parliamentary authorities by providing inaccurate information regarding his service history in order to secure appointment, resulting in his placement on a salary scale higher than that prescribed for the post, and that he had acted in violation of procedures set out by the Public Service Commission.
Mr. Kularatne, however, has rejected the allegations and stated during the inquiry that he believes he is being targeted due to a personal disagreement with Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne. Earlier this week, he lodged a formal complaint with the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) against the Speaker.
The decision to suspend Mr. Kularatne was taken by the Parliament Staff Advisory Committee (SAC), chaired by the Speaker and comprising the Leader of the House, the Leader of the Opposition, the Finance Minister or his nominee, and the Secretary General of Parliament.
Concerns have since been raised regarding whether due process was followed prior to the suspension. The Sunday Times reported that some members of the SAC questioned whether Mr. Kularatne had been suspended without being afforded an opportunity to formally respond to the allegations against him. Chief Opposition Whip Gayantha Karunathilaka, who represented the Opposition Leader at the relevant SAC meeting, confirmed in Parliament that he had repeatedly urged that Mr. Kularatne be given an opportunity to answer the charges—particularly in light of his claim that the matter was coloured by a personal dispute with the Speaker.
The suspension became one of the first issues raised when Parliament reconvened for its February sittings. SJB General Secretary Ranjith Maddumabandara told the House that he could not recall a prior instance of such a direct conflict between the Speaker and Parliament’s senior administrative officials. While stressing that he was not accusing the Speaker of wrongdoing, he warned that the situation risked undermining institutional functioning and called for an independent inquiry, along with an opportunity for Mr. Kularatne to respond to the charges against him.
Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa echoed those concerns, urging the Speaker to adhere strictly to established procedure and to “take a step back” in handling the matter. ITAK MP Shanakiyan Rasamanickam cautioned that the episode risked sending a troubling message to parliamentary officials—that disagreement or dissent could result in punitive action without even a formal charge sheet. Such a perception, he argued, would set a dangerous precedent for an institution intended to serve as the country’s foremost democratic safeguard.
Chief Government Whip Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa maintained that the suspension was not a unilateral act by Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne but a collective decision taken by the SAC. He noted that the former official who conducted the inquiry had been appointed in August last year and questioned why concerns had not been raised earlier by Opposition representatives who sat on the committee. Dr. Jayatissa also rejected claims that Mr. Kularatne had been denied a right of reply, stating that he had been given an opportunity to respond during the preliminary process and would have a further opportunity to answer the charges at a formal inquiry scheduled to be held.
Meanwhile, parliamentary sources indicate that Mr. Kularatne is expected to file a writ application in the Court of Appeal challenging his suspension.
Mr. Kularatne’s complaint to CIABOC, sets out a series of allegations against the Speaker. He states that, in addition to his roles as Deputy Secretary General and Chief of Staff, he served as an Information Officer under the Right to Information Act and as head of the Internal Affairs Unit established under the Anti-Corruption Act.
He claims that during this period he repeatedly drew the Speaker’s attention to what he describes as illegal and corrupt activities allegedly committed through abuse of official power.
He further alleges that his support for the disclosure of information sought by civil society activists under the RTI Act, together with a personal incident said to have occurred in the Speaker’s dining room in June last year, contributed to a breakdown in relations. According to Mr. Kularatne, these factors culminated in what he describes as a targeted suspension.
The complaint to CIABOC includes allegations relating to the alleged misuse of official vehicles and fuel allowances, parliamentary media equipment, multiple official residences, and the obstruction of information disclosures under the RTI Act. CIABOC has since confirmed that it has decided to commence an inquiry into the complaint.
As matters now stand, the episode has moved beyond an internal administrative dispute and into the realm of legal and institutional scrutiny—raising broader questions about due process, proportionality, and the safeguards that govern Parliament itself.
