A Fraud, A Death, and Growing Doubts
While Sri Lanka’s depleted treasury was slowly recovering with foreign reserves under an austerity-driven economy shaped during the administration of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the people continued to suffer.
Amid this hardship, the loss of US$2.5 million of public funds to cyber criminals, “hackers or dragons” deepened public distress. That pain turned into sorrow last Thursday with the sudden death of an Assistant Director of the Foreign Resources Department of the Ministry of Finance, who had been suspended over the alleged fraud.
Although the death has been officially reported as a suicide, suspicions remain. The incident occurred at his residence in Kuliyapitiya, and injuries on his body have raised questions about whether it can be conclusively considered a suicide.
The officer, Ranga Nishantha Rajapaksa, a graduate of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura, was also said to be an active member of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP). He was the first to lodge a formal complaint with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) regarding this fraud and had reportedly given statements on four occasions.
At the time of his death, the Committee on Public Finance was meeting in Parliament to inquire into the US$2.5 million fraud. Members, including Dr. Harsha de Silva, were questioning the Secretary to the Ministry of Finance. Several members received news of his death on their mobile phones, shocking not only the committee but the entire state sector.
Officials of the Ministry of Finance describe the deceased as a genuine and honest officer. Many only learned after his death that he had been a committed member of the JVP student movement. Given these circumstances, contradictions naturally arise. If this was indeed a suicide, questions remain about the pressures faced by an officer who initiated the complaint and cooperated with investigations. A thorough and independent investigation is essential.
Rajapaksa appears to have been involved at both the beginning and the end of the transaction process. He was the officer who forwarded payment requests later believed to have originated from a fake email to the Public Debt Management Department, which then sent them to the Central Bank. It is also alleged that even after suspicions were raised regarding certain accounts, proper follow-up action was not taken, and communication continued with the sender of the fraudulent email.
Four officers, including Rajapaksa, were suspended based on the recommendation of a committee, without a preliminary investigation. This has raised concerns within the public service, as it places officials under pressure and creates a sense of helplessness. Given the complex chain of responsibility, extending to the highest levels of the Ministry of Finance, it is difficult to hold only these officers accountable while ignoring systemic failures.
The mysterious death of a public official linked to a major financial fraud, combined with the unprecedented loss of US$2.5 million through what appears to be a relatively simple cyber scheme, has become a matter of serious national concern.
Accountability, Delays, and Unanswered Questions
Following the exposure of the fraud, the Committee on Public Finance took up the matter after being informed by the Free Lawyers Organization, including President’s Counsel Methri Gunaratne and Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon. The committee sent a letter to the Ministry of Finance seeking clarification, but it reportedly did not receive an adequate response.
The Secretary to the Ministry of Finance, Harshana Suriyapperuma, was summoned to appear before Parliament. Initially, he informed that he could not attend, stating that the President would make a statement at a later date. This decision drew criticism. However, he later reversed his position and appeared before the committee.
During the proceedings, officials admitted that the fraud had taken place but failed to provide clear details. It was revealed that payments were made in about ten installments between November and January. However, some sources indicate that the total amount of US$2.5 million was transferred in a single transaction in January.
The fraud is believed to have been carried out through a fake email address. This raises serious concerns as to whether officials were misled by cyber criminals, whether internal systems were compromised, or whether sensitive information was leaked. The loan involved is linked to an Australian government agency, making the breach even more alarming.
According to the Finance Secretary, the incident was detected in January. However, under financial regulations, such incidents must be immediately reported to the police, and a preliminary investigation must be conducted within seven days. Law enforcement should then report the matter to the courts without delay. In this case, meaningful action appears to have been taken only in late April, raising serious concerns about delays.
Questions have also been raised about leadership and institutional capacity. Critics argue that key appointments have been made without sufficient experience in public administration and financial management, weakening the system at a critical time.
The Public Finance Management Act No. 44 of 2024 introduced structural changes, shifting public debt management from the Central Bank to the Ministry of Finance. The year 2025 served as a transitional period. According to the Act, a joint management committee should oversee such processes. However, allegations suggest that this mechanism was not properly implemented.
It is reported that seven out of the ten payments were processed through the Central Bank during this transition period. If proper oversight mechanisms had been in place, this fraud could have been detected at an early stage.
Even now, basic details about how the fraud occurred have not been publicly disclosed. This lack of transparency raises serious concerns and leaves the public with unanswered questions.
Join our WhatsApp / Telegram groups below.
