Questions Raised Over SJB Figure Charith Abeysinghe’s Past Following Anti-Government Campaign
Colombo — Fresh questions have emerged over the political conduct and personal history of Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) activist and self-described film director Charith Abeysinghe, following his recent participation in a religious-themed protest campaign opposing the education reforms introduced by Education Minister and Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya.
Abeysinghe recently led a group of women to the sacred city of Katharagama, where coconuts were ceremonially broken as a symbolic protest against the National People’s Power (NPP) government’s education policy agenda. The act, widely circulated on social media, drew criticism from civil society groups who questioned the politicisation of religious practices and the credibility of those leading the campaign.
Background Under Scrutiny
The controversy has been compounded by renewed public discussion of Abeysinghe’s past in the United Kingdom. According to previously reported court proceedings, a person bearing the same name pleaded guilty at the Crown Court in the UK to charges related to conspiracy to steal and money-laundering offences connected to a large-scale cash exchange operation, reportedly valued at approximately £60 million. Court records from that period indicate that the accused was sentenced to a custodial term of seven years.
The case reportedly involved complex financial transactions, including the movement and laundering of illicit cash through intermediaries and exchange mechanisms. Following completion of the sentence, the individual is understood to have returned to Sri Lanka.
While Abeysinghe has since entered political activism under the SJB banner, he has not publicly addressed these reports in detail, nor clarified the circumstances surrounding the UK conviction or his subsequent return to Sri Lanka.
Calls for Transparency
Political analysts and anti-corruption advocates argue that such silence is untenable for an individual seeking public office or political influence—particularly when positioning himself as a moral critic of a government elected on an anti-corruption platform.
“When someone actively mobilises religious sentiment against a reformist government, the public has a legitimate right to ask who that person is and whether their own record withstands scrutiny,” a Colombo-based governance researcher told this publication.
The argument, critics say, is not about punishment already served, but about transparency, accountability, and credibility.
Public Interest and Political Ethics
Abeysinghe, who is also a father of three daughters, is now being urged by commentators to publicly explain the circumstances of the UK case—what went wrong, why a guilty plea was entered, and what lessons, if any, were drawn from the experience.
“These are questions not only voters may ask, but questions his own children may one day ask,” said a senior civil society activist. “In politics, personal history matters because it informs public trust.”
Opposition figures within and outside the SJB note that raising moral or ethical objections against an anti-corruption government places a higher burden on the accuser to demonstrate personal integrity.
Silence from the SJB
As of publication, the SJB leadership has not issued a statement clarifying Abeysinghe’s status within the party or responding to the questions raised regarding his past. Repeated attempts to contact Abeysinghe for comment were unsuccessful.
Legal observers also point out that if Abeysinghe disputes the accuracy of the reported UK court records, he has the opportunity—and responsibility—to place his version of events on record.
A Test of Political Credibility
The episode underscores a broader dilemma facing Sri Lankan politics: whether individuals with unresolved questions about past criminal convictions can credibly position themselves as champions of morality, reform, or public virtue.
As the NPP government continues to frame its agenda around institutional reform and anti-corruption measures, scrutiny of opposition figures is likely to intensify.
For now, the question remains unanswered: will Charith Abeysinghe publicly address the reported UK money-laundering conviction, explain his past to Sri Lankan voters, and clarify how it aligns with his current political activism—or continue to remain silent?