A list of beneficiaries of the President’s Fund is going viral on social media platforms, sparking controversy in the general society as most of these beneficiaries are politicians and well-connected figures and not ordinary citizens.
According to the list that is being circulated, several beneficiaries, who are well-known politicians, have received several millions of rupees from the Fund. In some cases, some politicians have allegedly used this money to obtain medical treatments from high-end foreign hospitals, while the ordinary citizens’ experience has been one where getting even a few hundred thousand rupees from the Fund is an arduous process. In this context, the people are asking whether and to what extent ordinary citizens have benefitted from the Fund, and this is a matter that the new Government has to address if it is to implement its enthusiastic anti-corruption and anti-waste policies.
A major concern in this regard is the process, or the lack thereof, to monitor how Fund recipients have utilised the funds provided and received. According to the Presidential Secretariat, which The Daily Morning quoted earlier this week, at present, there is no mechanism to ascertain or monitor whether the funds provided to recipients have been utilised for the stated and intended purpose. Presidential Secretariat Director General (Legal), attorney J.M. Wijebandara, expressed concerns that it is the present Government that should establish such a mechanism or process. As a Fund that depends on income received from the Development Lotteries Board, and more importantly, public donations, if there is no mechanism to monitor what became of the funds, that is a matter of public finances which is ultimately a matter that calls for the Parliament’s attention and action.
At the same time, The Daily Morning’s inquiries have brought to light another concern, i.e. the need to adopt a more stringent process to approve funding-related requests. According to Ven. Prof. Medagoda Abhayatissa Thera, who is a member of the Fund’s Board of Governors, the Board primarily takes decisions about the purposes for which funds should be allocated. The responsibility of reviewing and approving funds-related requests lies with the Fund's administrative staff, including the Secretary to the Fund. While this may be the process that has been approved by the President's Fund Act, per the background of major beneficiaries of the Fund who have received millions as well as prevailing corruption- and waste-related concerns when it comes to the management of public funds, this situation is a good reason to revisit the process of reviewing and approving fund requests. As a start, the members of the Board of Governors could also be included in that process, and the selection process could be made more stringent, especially when it comes to the eligibility criteria.
According to the Act, the Fund has been established to provide funds for the relief of poverty, the advancement of education or knowledge, the advancement of religion, the making of awards to persons who have served the nation, any other purposes beneficial or of interest to the public, and for related matters. These purposes are important, and it is crucial to assist those with financial difficulties to fulfill such needs. However, if the allocation and utilisation of funds remain questionable to the point where the public question the Fund’s usefulness to them, be it due to the actual misuse of funds or the room to misuse funds, that is a concern that the Government should address to achieve its anti-corruption- and anti-waste-related agenda. Simple yet completely justifiable steps that can be taken include requiring Fund beneficiaries to present proof of expenses, and requiring them to return any unused funds.
This week, the Government said that it will review the major fund allocations made through the Fund during the 2005-2024 period. This endeavour should also look into whether the process of reviewing and approving fund requests was conducted in accordance with the Act, and whether any conflicts of interests have occurred. The conduct of such a thorough inquiry will allow the Government to address the people’s concerns – if the list of beneficiaries that is being shared is misleading or incomplete, the Government will be able to take steps with regard to this spread of misinformation, and if the list in fact shows serious transparency-related issues concerning the Fund, the Government will be able to take legal, policy, and practical measures to address those issues.
It should however be noted that this is not a matter of politicians receiving funds through the Fund to obtain medical treatments or other services permitted through the Act. This is about the seemingly disproportionate allocation of funds for politicians and other connected figures compared with other applicants, which is a concern shared by a plethora of ordinary citizens who have witnessed an astronomical misuse of public funds during the past few decades. The Fund, maintained including through public donations, should be managed in a more equitable manner that not only benefits the public, but also restores the faith in the country’s governing system.