It has been three months since Cyclone Ditva tore through Sri Lanka, leaving a trail of destruction that affected thousands of families and critical infrastructure. In response, the government announced the creation of a new fund, titled ‘Rebuilding Sri Lanka,’ aimed at coordinating reconstruction efforts and channeling both domestic and international donations toward recovery projects. The initiative was formally launched on January 13, 2026, at a ceremony in Colombo under the patronage of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake. A management committee, chaired by Minister of Labour and Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning Dr. Anil Jayantha Fernando, was named to oversee the fund.
The announcement, however, immediately drew criticism from several quarters. Observers questioned the necessity of creating a separate fund when an existing mechanism—the Sri Lanka Disaster Management Fund, established under the 2005 Disaster Management Act—already exists to collect and allocate funds for disaster relief. Concerns were raised about legal authority, governance, and whether the new fund would operate with sufficient transparency.
To clarify these concerns, BBC Sinhala Service submitted an information request under the Right to Information Act No. 12 of 2016 to both the Presidential Secretariat and the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development on January 23, 2026. The responses, received over the following month, reveal a striking gap between the government’s public claims and the legal and administrative reality of the fund.
The first reply came from the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development on January 30, stating that all inquiries regarding the Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund fall under the purview of the President’s Office. This response indicated that, as of that date, no fund with that name exists under the Ministry of Finance. When asked directly whether the fund exists under the Presidential Secretariat, a response received via email on February 24, 2026, stated only that “the necessary steps are being taken to establish the Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund in the Presidential Secretariat.” In other words, the fund has not yet been legally established.
Questions regarding the legal basis for the fund yielded similarly ambiguous responses. A government press release in December 2025 provided bank account details for donations and suggested that the fund was operational. Opposition parties have repeatedly argued that no law supports its creation, noting that the Disaster Management Act already provides a statutory framework for such purposes. When BBC Sinhala Service asked the Presidential Secretariat about the legal provisions under which the fund was created, the reply was that “the bill related to the establishment of the Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund is being prepared.” This suggests that while the fund is being actively promoted, its legal foundation remains in progress.
Auditing and financial management also remain unclear. The Secretariat’s responses to questions on auditing procedures, administrative staff, salary payments, and expenditure approvals all repeated the line: “The necessary steps are being taken to establish the Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund at the Presidential Secretariat.” No concrete details were provided. Yet the government’s fundraising website, www.rebuildingsrilanka.gov.lk, reported that as of February 10, 2026, the fund had received Rs. 6.072 billion and US $10.29 million in contributions. These figures raise urgent questions about oversight, given that the fund is not yet formally established.
Further complications arise regarding governance. While the December 2025 press release indicated that a management committee comprising government and private sector representatives would be appointed, the responses to the information request stated that no management committee currently exists. Documents show that a proposed Governing Board, as per a Cabinet decision dated January 1, 2025, would include senior officials, regional governors, and private sector leaders such as CEOs and chairpersons from major companies. The stated purpose of this board is to provide strategic guidance, coordinate donations, and maintain transparency, but its powers remain largely undefined in practice.
The scope of the committee’s authority has been another source of confusion. While the December 2025 press release claimed the management committee would “assess needs, set priorities, allocate funds, and release funds for approved recovery activities,” the actual functions described by the Presidential Secretariat are limited to strategic guidance, awareness campaigns, and community engagement. Critics argue that without clear legal and operational authority, the fund’s promises of accountability are largely aspirational.
Concerns reached a broader stage during a discussion in the Committee on Public Finance on February 17, 2026, chaired by Samagi Jana Balawegaya MP Dr. Harsha de Silva. Dr. de Silva questioned the Deputy Treasury Secretary about the fund, who acknowledged that all contributions were being held in a DST account but admitted, “There is no law for it.” Dr. de Silva highlighted the oversight role of the Finance Committee, emphasizing that without proper legislation, the committee could not formally monitor a fund that legally does not exist. “Either the government takes a decision, or don’t talk about a Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund,” he said. “Because there is no Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund here.”
This unfolding situation illustrates a wider tension in Sri Lanka’s disaster management framework. While public donations and private sector participation have surged in response to Cyclone Ditva, the institutional structures meant to ensure accountability, legality, and proper governance are still catching up. The BBC Sinhala Service’s information request reveals that the Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund exists more as a concept than as a legally and administratively recognized entity. Without a formal legislative framework, the risk of mismanagement, miscommunication, and public skepticism remains high, raising fundamental questions about the effectiveness and transparency of disaster recovery efforts in Sri Lanka.
