By: Adolf
May 11, LNW (Colombo): The controversy surrounding the lease of an Airbus A330-200 by SriLankan Airlines has once again placed the national carrier under intense public scrutiny. At a time when Sri Lanka is still recovering from economic collapse, allegations of financial mismanagement involving a state-owned enterprise inevitably attract public anger and political attention. The issue has become even more sensitive in the backdrop of reports surrounding the tragic death of a former Sri Lankan CEO Chandresena , further fuelling debate on governance, accountability, and the culture of corporate decision-making in the country.
Opposition MP Dayasiri Jayasekara has publicly questioned why SriLankan Airlines entered into what he describes as an expensive lease arrangement for a 14-year-old aircraft while allegedly allowing the public to believe that it was acquiring a “new aircraft.” He has called for greater transparency and urged the Government to explain the rationale behind the transaction.
The controversy deepened after journalist Rahul Samantha Hettiarachchi succeeded in obtaining details of the agreement through Sri Lanka’s Right to Information process after a prolonged effort to access the documents. According to information disclosed before the Right to Information Commission, the aircraft in question — Airbus A330-200 bearing registration 4R-ALT — was acquired under an eight-year operating lease agreement rather than through an outright purchase.
The documents reportedly reveal that SriLankan Airlines is committed to an initial monthly lease payment of approximately USD 275,000. The agreement, running from June 2025 to June 2033, translates into an annual lease obligation of roughly USD 3.3 million and a total commitment estimated at USD 26.6 million over the eight-year period.
Critics argue that the issue is not necessarily the age of the aircraft itself. Around the world, airlines routinely lease and operate aircraft older than 14 years provided they are economically viable, technically reliable, and properly maintained. The real concern, they say, is whether SriLankan Airlines provided sufficient transparency regarding the commercial justification for the lease, the valuation process, and whether the deal represented value for money for a financially strained country.
Questions have also emerged regarding why the airline initially resisted disclosing details of the agreement, reportedly citing “commercial secrecy,” before the Information Commission ordered the release of the financial information. For many observers, such resistance has only fuelled public suspicion and undermined confidence in the governance standards of the national carrier.
Attention is now increasingly turning toward the airline’s Chairman, Sarath Ganegoda. Critics argue that he owes the public a comprehensive explanation regarding the lease structure, operational necessity, cost assumptions, and approval process behind the acquisition. In the eyes of many taxpayers, silence or limited disclosure is no longer acceptable when public institutions continue to depend directly or indirectly on state support.
Questions have also been raised regarding governance practices during his tenure, including allegations surrounding conflicts of interest and concerns expressed by critics over extensions of leadership despite controversy. Whether fair or unfair, these concerns have now become part of a wider public discussion about accountability within state-owned enterprises.
Further criticism has emerged over reports that substantial amounts were spent on ceremonial or promotional operations involving the aircraft, including allegations regarding showcase flights over Sri Lanka intended to promote the national carrier’s image. These claims, whether ultimately substantiated or not, have intensified frustration among citizens already burdened by taxation, austerity measures, and the lingering effects of the economic crisis.
Sri Lanka today is a very different country from what it was a decade ago. Citizens are demanding greater accountability from politicians, corporate leaders, boards, regulators, and public institutions. In that environment, perceptions matter almost as much as facts. Any appearance of opacity, waste, preferential treatment, or weak governance within a state-owned enterprise is likely to provoke strong public reaction.
Ultimately, this issue is no longer just about one aircraft lease. It is about whether public institutions and those entrusted with leadership positions are prepared to operate with the transparency, accountability, and governance discipline that the Sri Lankan public increasingly expects. And on that question, many believe that Sarath Ganegoda and the leadership of SriLankan Airlines still owe the country clear answers.
The post Sarath Ganegoda; Public Needs Answers? appeared first on LNW Lanka News Web.
