The Free Lawyers Organisation has expressed serious concern over the ongoing investigation into an alleged cyberattack involving a Treasury transaction of approximately 2.5 million US dollars, arguing that the handling of the case raises fundamental questions about transparency, administrative responsibility, and procedural urgency. According to the organisation, five days have passed since the incident came to light, yet key facts have not been formally presented before a Magistrate’s Court. The group also claims that investigators have not yet recorded statements from suspended officers who are believed to be connected to the case, describing the delay as a matter requiring immediate public accountability.
In its formal communication, the organisation has framed the situation as not only a financial security concern but also a governance issue, pointing to what it describes as a lack of visible progress in the early stages of the investigation. It argues that the absence of court reporting and incomplete engagement with key witnesses could undermine public confidence in the integrity of the investigative process. Against this backdrop, the organisation has issued a detailed set of 22 questions directed at President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and the Cabinet, calling for clear explanations regarding the handling of the alleged cyber incident and the institutional response that followed.
Central to the organisation’s concerns is whether senior state officials accept that funds amounting to 2.5 million US dollars may have been misappropriated or lost from the Treasury system, and whether the President had been formally informed of the incident’s details and timing. The group further questions whether the administration was aware of a cyberattack allegedly launched against the Ministry of Finance data systems around September 6, 2025, and whether the Secretary to the Treasury had communicated such developments to both the President and the Deputy Minister of Finance.
The questions also extend to the nature of the response taken after any such communication, with the organisation seeking clarification on what actions were initiated once the alleged breach was reportedly identified. It raises broader governance concerns by asking whether the leadership acknowledges responsibility for oversight across multiple sectors, including finance, planning, digital affairs, and national security, suggesting that any compromise in the Treasury system could potentially indicate wider institutional vulnerabilities.
A significant portion of the inquiry focuses on the appointment and role of the Secretary to the Treasury, whom the organisation states was selected under the current administration. It questions whether the President acknowledges the appointee’s political background and alleged lack of prior experience in financial administration, Treasury operations, or national planning functions. The organisation further raises concerns about whether proper administrative procedures were followed in handling the aftermath of the alleged cyber incident.
Among the most serious claims referenced in the questions are allegations that the Finance Secretary may have altered appointments or preliminary investigation documents, which the organisation presents as potentially amounting to interference in evidence. It also seeks clarification on whether the incident occurred after the appointment of the Secretary and whether appropriate procedural safeguards were followed in documenting and escalating the matter within government channels.
The Free Lawyers Organisation additionally raises constitutional concerns, questioning whether the alleged incident was reported to Parliament in line with obligations under Article 148, and if not, why such information was not disclosed to either Parliament or the public despite the administration’s regular parliamentary engagements. It further asks whether withholding such information, if it occurred, would constitute a serious breach of public trust and parliamentary accountability.
Another set of questions relates to law enforcement procedures, specifically whether a formal complaint regarding the alleged cyberattack was lodged with the Criminal Investigation Department or other relevant cybercrime authorities prior to April 21, 2026. The organisation requests clarity on when the first official complaint was made, who initiated it, and whether any delays in reporting could be considered administrative negligence. It also questions whether the absence of a timely complaint, if confirmed, would represent a significant oversight in responding to a major financial cyber incident.
Beyond procedural issues, the organisation raises broader governance and confidence concerns. It asks whether the President continues to maintain trust in the current Secretary to the Treasury in light of the allegations, including claims of irregularities and administrative failures. It further questions whether a fair and impartial investigation can realistically proceed while the official remains in office, implying a potential conflict of interest that could affect investigative integrity.
In the concluding portion of its inquiry, the organisation directly urges consideration of administrative action, asking whether the President would facilitate a more transparent investigation by removing the current Secretary to the Ministry of Finance. This final question reflects the organisation’s position that structural changes may be necessary to ensure public confidence in the investigation’s outcome.
The Free Lawyers Organisation has emphasized that its 22 questions are intended to secure accountability rather than to pre-empt investigative conclusions. However, it has also underscored that the absence of timely reporting, incomplete procedural action, and unanswered questions surrounding institutional responsibility risk undermining public trust in the handling of a potentially significant cyber-related financial breach. As of now, there has been no official public response from the President or the Cabinet addressing the concerns raised in the statement.
