- Three levels of legal reforms required, including amendments to Constitution and act
The benefits being provided to former heads of state in the country have come under sharp scrutiny recently, with the Cabinet-appointed Chitrasiri committee recommending in principle to remove all their retirement benefits.
According to Adviser (Legal) to the President J.M. Wijebandara, the committee headed by retired Supreme Court Justice K.T. Chitrasiri has recommended to remove, “on principle,” all retirement benefits being provided to former presidents and their widows.
“In order to do that, we need to execute three levels of legal reforms. For certain areas, constitutional amendments are needed. For others, amending the Presidents Entitlements Act No.4 of 1986 is needed. For some, we need to amend administrative circulars.
“We’re in the process of amending those in order to fulfil the policy of the National People’s Power (NPP) Government to do away with retirement benefits,” Wijebandara told The Sunday Morning.
The Presidents Entitlements Act regulates the provision of residences, payment of secretarial allowances, provision of official transport and other facilities, and payment of pensions to widows of former presidents.
Precedent
This isn’t the first occasion on which entitlements granted to former presidents have come into focus. A Fundamental Rights (FR) petition filed against former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga challenged the then Cabinet for securing Kumaratunga a developed land close to Parliament, a house in Colombo 7, and staff and other facilities to use after her retirement.
In 2007, the court held that the Presidents Entitlements Act was “intrinsically an exception to the concept of equality before the law, since no other holder of public office is granted such benefits”.
It further said that with “the provisions of this act being an exception in itself to equality before the law,” they had to be “strictly interpreted and applied”.
This case was cited in February 2024 when the case filed by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) against former President Maithripala Sirisena was called. The CPA’s FR petition challenged the decision of the then Cabinet to allow Sirisena the continuous use of the residence used by him at the time of his presidency and to cover the costs associated with the house with public money.
In both rulings, the court held that a former president should refrain from participating in any decision about their entitlements after retirement. In 2024, the court also noted that the Presidents Entitlements Act was contrary to Article 12 of the Constitution, which enshrines the concept of equality before the law.
Thus, the court quashed the Cabinet decision to grant Sirisena the residence he was using during his presidency after retirement as well. In the case against Kumaratunga too, the court held that she was entitled only to what was provided by the Presidents Entitlements Act – “an appropriate residence free of rent and where an appropriate residence is not available, a monthly allowance of one-third of the monthly pension”.
The Wijerama residence
The topic of residences given by the State to former presidents is once again being discussed after President Anura Kumara Dissanayake said that the State-provided house on Wijerama Mawatha, Colombo 7, where former President Mahinda Rajapaksa is currently residing, could bring in a monthly rent of Rs. 4.6 million.
“According to the Constitution, a former president is entitled to a residence or a third of their salary. Therefore, we will take over the residence and provide a third of his salary, which amounts to Rs. 30,000. Else, he can pay the remaining amount and purchase it. If he does not pay the remaining amount, he has to vacate the premises.
“This is the way forward. We must develop this country. Until now, they have misled the public and lived luxuriously on public funds,” said Dissanayake at a rally held recently.
Although the law is very clear in terms of what can be provided to former heads of state as entitlements upon retirement, in practice, the law has been interpreted “very freely,” according to CPA Senior Researcher Bhavani Fonseka.
“The way it has been used in the past raises questions, so it strengthens the hand of the present Government when it looks into why this [entitlement] is needed,” she told The Sunday Morning.
While highlighting the need for accountability on how resources were spent, she also said it “should not be seen as a political witch hunt”.
When former heads of state have abused that power in the past, the Supreme Court has come out very clearly on what the law provides for, according to Fonseka. “You shouldn’t go beyond that,” she added.
According to Wijebandara, only Sirisena, Mahinda Rajapaksa, and Kumaratunga are currently residing in State-provided housing. Former Presidents Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Ranil Wickremesinghe are residing privately, and Hema Premadasa – the widow of former President R. Premadasa – vacated her State bungalow last year.
A question of rationalisation
Attorney-at-Law Luwie Niranjan, speaking to The Sunday Morning, questioned why spouses of former presidents were being maintained at a significant expense to the public. “There should be rationalisations for these [actions],” he said.
Rationalisation should also be a priority in the question of security, said Niranjan, observing that the Presidents Entitlements Act did not specify any criteria for security and other benefits for former heads of state.
“Amendments to make these specifics would be useful. Are there credible threat assessments done when giving security? There needs to be transparency in these processes,” he added.
Last week, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa filed an FR seeking an order for the deployment of his security detail, which was reduced.
However, Wijebandara said he did not agree with the word ‘reduced,’ noting that security was not a right but a need fulfilled based on a security assessment done for an individual.
“What is reasonable and what is needed is being provided,” he said with reference to Rajapaksa’s security detail.
“Security isn’t a benefit or privilege. It’s a need which has to be evaluated and recommended by appropriate experts, and it is the duty of the government to ensure the security of any citizen. If any citizen finds his life or property is threatened, it’s the duty of the government to look into that matter. It’s not an entitlement and it should not be the policy,” he added.
Speaking to The Sunday Morning, Public Security Minister Ananda Wijepala said that a committee including State Intelligence Service (SIS) officials was tasked with evaluating requests for security. The present Government has received requests for security from some northern Members of Parliament (MPs) and from Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s security detail currently consisted of 60 Police officers and 228 tri-forces officials, the Minister said while addressing Parliament in December 2024. According to Wijepala’s statement to Parliament, the current security details of other former heads of state are as follows:
- Former President Maithripala Sirisena: Four Army officers and 60 Police officers
- Former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa: 188 tri-forces officials and 22 Police officers
- Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe: 57 Army officers and 60 Police officers
- Former President Chandrika Kumaratunga: 60 Police officers
Additionally, former First Lady Premadasa has been allotted 10 Police officers for her protection.
Expenses
According to the Treasury’s budget estimates published in 2024, the total expenditure for former presidents and widows was Rs. 110,000,000. This figure accounts for retirement benefits, buildings and structures, vehicles, and other (unspecified) for Kumaratunga, Hema Premadasa, Sirisena, and the Rajapaksa presidential duo.
In 2022 and 2023, the total expenditure for the five individuals stood at Rs. 73,733,000 and Rs. 84,460,000, respectively. According to the same document, the total expenditure is projected to increase to Rs. 117,000,000 in 2026.