Did Mahinda Deshapriya Receive Bribes? Examining the 2019 Presidential Nomination Controversy
The 2019 Sri Lankan presidential election remains one of the most contentious political events in the country's recent history, with questions surrounding the eligibility of candidate Gotabaya Rajapaksa continuing to generate debate. Central to this controversy is former Elections Commission Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya, who faced allegations ranging from professional negligence to outright bribery. This article examines the facts surrounding the nomination process and addresses the serious allegations made against Deshapriya.
The Core Controversy: Citizenship and Nominations
The primary issue centered on whether Gotabaya Rajapaksa had validly renounced his United States citizenship before contesting the presidency. Under Sri Lankan law, dual citizens were disqualified from contesting the presidential election at that time. However, the Elections Commission maintained that verifying citizenship was not within its jurisdiction.
Deshapriya's Response: The Commission's Limited Role
At a news briefing held at the Government Information Department, Mahinda Deshapriya responded directly to questions about the Commission's handling of citizenship documents. According to Deshapriya, lawyer Ali Sabry presented a document claiming to be a genuine certificate of renunciation of Mr. Rajapaksa's US citizenship.
Deshapriya explained: "I took a look at it and handed it over to Commissioner Nalin Abeykoon PC. He then gave it to Commissioner Ratnajeevan Hoole. Later, he returned the document to Mr. Sabri. We were not aware of its authenticity and verifying authenticity is not our job".
This statement established the Commission's official position: they were merely recipients of documents, not investigators of their validity.
The Commission's Five-Point Qualification Check
Deshapriya elaborated on the Commission's narrow mandate, stating that when accepting nominations for a presidential election, they were solely concerned with five specific qualifications:
The candidate must be a citizen of Sri Lanka
Must be over 35 years of age
Must be an eligible elector
Must not be subject to disqualifications under Article 91 of the Constitution
If nominated by a political party, must be a sitting Member of Parliament or former MP
Crucially, Deshapriya emphasized: "We are not concerned whether he or she is a dual citizen or not at the time of taking the nomination". This position effectively placed citizenship challenges outside the Commission's purview.
The Legal Framework: Citizenship Challenges in Court
Deshapriya directed those with citizenship concerns to the judicial system: "If there is a doubt on the citizenship of any candidate, it has to be challenged in the relevant court". This was consistent with the legal framework, as the Court of Appeal had previously dismissed a case seeking to withdraw Rajapaksa's citizenship.
When pressed on what would happen if a candidate were successfully challenged after being elected, Deshapriya responded with "no comments".
Civil activists have called on the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) to examine allegations surrounding former Election Commission Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya's handling of citizenship and renunciation documentation submitted during the 2019 presidential election period. They have urged investigators to determine whether any improper inducements were offered or received, whether the documents in question were properly verified, and whether any individual or political group exerted undue influence over the decision-making process. Activists argue that a transparent and independent investigation is necessary to address public concerns and establish the facts surrounding the acceptance of the renunciation documents linked to the Gotabaya Rajapaksa campaign.
Evidence of Internal Disagreement
Tensions within the Election Commission became apparent through subsequent revelations. Professor Ratnajeevan Hoole, a former Commission member, filed an affidavit claiming he had repeatedly raised concerns about Rajapaksa's citizenship status. According to Hoole, when he questioned whether Rajapaksa had formally renounced his American citizenship, Deshapriya reportedly stated "it was not the responsibility of the Commission; and it was up to the Supreme Court to decide".
Hoole further alleged that when he pressed the issue, Deshapriya indicated that other candidates could raise objections on nomination day. However, no objections were ultimately raised. Hoole also claimed to have learned that Deshapriya had communicated with Rajapaksa's election team about these internal discussions, reportedly causing the academic to fear for his safety.
The Bribery Allegation: Was There Evidence?
The serious allegation that Deshapriya received bribes emerged in legal petitions filed by activist Nagananda Kodituwakku. The petition moved against both the Bribery and Corruption Commission and the Election Commission, alleging that Deshapriya had "committed a punishable offense consciously by accepting nomination of Gotabaya Rajapaksa offering him a chance to contest the election despite the grounds available for rejecting his nomination".
However, it is crucial to note that conclusive evidence of bribery has been presented in court proceeding. The allegations largely stem from interpretation of events rather than documented proof of financial impropriety.
The Timing Issue
Critics point to a significant chronology: Rajapaksa's name appeared in the US Federal Register of those who had renounced citizenship on August 5, 2020, after the presidential election had concluded. This has led to claims that he had not actually completed the renunciation process when nominations were accepted.
Ali Sabry, Rajapaksa's attorney, defended his client by explaining that it "could take months or even a year for the name of a person who renounces US citizenship to get on the Federal Register," and produced documents he claimed confirmed Rajapaksa had renounced his citizenship.
The controversy surrounding Mahinda Deshapriya and the acceptance of Gotabaya Rajapaksa's nomination raises important questions about institutional roles, the limits of the Elections Commission's authority, and the proper venue for citizenship challenges.
While serious allegations of bribery were made in legal petitions, evidence has been produced to substantiate claims that Deshapriya personally received bribes. The available evidence instead points to a fundamental disagreement about the Commission's responsibilities and the interpretation of election law.
The case ultimately highlighted a systemic tension: the Elections Commission maintained it could only verify certain qualifications, while critics argued it should have taken more proactive steps to investigate citizenship status. This controversy continues to serve as a cautionary tale about the importance of clear legal frameworks and the challenges facing election oversight bodies in high-stakes political contests.