By a Staff Correspondent
Sri Lanka’s energy sector is once again under the spotlight, this time over calls by trade unions for a comprehensive investigation into the tenure of a former chairman of the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC). At the centre of the demand is Mohammed Uvais, whose appointment and subsequent decisions are now being scrutinised amid broader concerns about transparency, procurement integrity, and political patronage.
The unions’ position is direct: conduct a full forensic audit—“down to the last rupee”—to determine whether public funds were managed in accordance with law and best practice.
Appointment and Qualifications Under Question
The controversy begins with the circumstances of Uvais’s appointment. Critics, including union representatives, have questioned the basis on which he was selected to lead one of the country’s most strategically sensitive state-owned enterprises.
His perceived proximity to Ali Sabry—a senior political figure who has held portfolios including justice and foreign affairs—has intensified scrutiny. While familial or personal connections are not, in themselves, evidence of wrongdoing, governance experts note that such associations heighten the need for demonstrable merit and transparent selection processes.
In the absence of publicly documented criteria or competitive vetting, the appointment has become emblematic of a wider concern: whether key state institutions have been vulnerable to politically influenced placements.
The Scope of the Allegations
Union leaders are not alleging guilt; they are demanding verification. Their call centres on several operational domains during Uvais’s tenure:
1. Procurement Processes
CPC’s procurement—particularly fuel imports—is a high-value, high-risk function. Questions have been raised about how suppliers were selected, whether tenders were competitive, and whether pricing mechanisms reflected market conditions.
2. Distribution Decisions
Fuel allocation to distributors and large-scale consumers is another focal point. Unions are seeking clarity on whether distribution decisions were consistent, transparent, and free from preferential treatment.
3. Financial Controls and Accounts
Reports of new or restructured bank accounts during the relevant period have prompted calls for a detailed examination of CPC’s financial architecture. Auditors would need to assess authorisation procedures, fund flows, and compliance with public finance regulations.
4. Advisory Appointments
The recruitment of external advisors—often justified as bringing in specialised expertise—has also come under scrutiny. Key questions include the selection criteria, remuneration structures, and the measurable value delivered by such appointments.
5. Allocation of Funds
From operational expenditure to capital investments, unions are demanding a clear accounting of how funds were allocated and whether those allocations aligned with institutional priorities.
The Case for a Forensic Audit
A routine audit, analysts argue, may not suffice. What is being proposed is a forensic audit—an exercise that goes beyond compliance to actively investigate potential irregularities, trace financial flows, and identify anomalies.
Such an audit would typically involve:
- Cross-referencing procurement contracts with market benchmarks
- Analysing transaction-level data for patterns of irregularity
- Mapping relationships between decision-makers and counterparties
- Verifying beneficial ownership in supplier networks
In the Sri Lankan context, oversight bodies such as the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption and the Auditor General's Department of Sri Lanka would be central to any credible investigation.
Presumption of Innocence—and the Need for Clarity
It is important to emphasise that, at this stage, these are allegations and concerns—not findings of wrongdoing. A properly conducted investigation serves two equally important purposes: identifying misconduct where it exists, and clearing reputations where it does not.
Indeed, some within policy circles argue that a transparent audit could ultimately benefit Uvais. If no irregularities are found, a formal exoneration—backed by documented evidence—would put speculation to rest.
In a climate where public trust in institutions is fragile, clarity is itself a public good.
A Test Case for Reform
For the administration of Anura Kumara Dissanayake, the CPC case represents more than a single investigation. It is a test of a broader anti-corruption mandate.
The government has pledged to dismantle entrenched systems of patronage and to impose higher standards of accountability across state-owned enterprises. Delivering on that promise requires not only new policies but also the willingness to revisit past decisions—particularly where public funds and strategic assets are involved.
The Strategic Importance of CPC
The stakes are high. CPC is not just another state entity; it is central to Sri Lanka’s energy security and economic stability. Its decisions affect everything from transport costs to industrial output and inflation.
Any perception of mismanagement or favouritism within such an institution carries systemic risk.
What Happens Next?
As of now, the unions’ demands have placed the issue firmly on the policy agenda. The next steps will depend on political will and institutional capacity:
- Will the government commission an independent forensic audit?
- Will oversight bodies be given the mandate and resources to investigate thoroughly?
- Will findings—whatever they may be—be made public?
These questions will determine whether the current controversy becomes a turning point or another unresolved chapter.
Accountability as Policy
In modern governance, accountability is not an optional add-on; it is a core function. Where allegations arise—particularly in relation to public funds—the response must be systematic, transparent, and evidence-based.
The unions have made their demand. The institutions exist. The legal framework is in place.
What remains is execution.
Whether Mohammed Uvais emerges from such scrutiny vindicated or implicated is, ultimately, a matter for investigation—not speculation.
But the larger outcome—restoring confidence in how Sri Lanka manages its public enterprises—will depend on whether that investigation happens at all.