President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s recent agreements with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have sparked controversy. Despite mounting pressure from opposition leaders and civil society, the Sri Lankan government refuses to make the details public.
During Modi’s visit to Colombo this month, the two leaders signed multiple agreements/memorandum of understanding (MoU), but the contents remain undisclosed. Opposition parties, led by the Frontline Socialist Party (FSP) and Sarvajana Balavegaya, are now accusing the government of hiding clauses that could compromise national interests.
Opposition lawmakers have repeatedly demanded that the agreements be made public, but the government has yet to table them in parliament. Cabinet Spokesman Nalinda Jayatissa previously claimed that disclosing the documents would require India’s permission, which has only fueled suspicions.
“Why the secrecy? If these deals benefit Sri Lanka, why not reveal them?” asked the FSP leader Pubudu Jagoda, who has branded the agreements as a “sell-out” of national sovereignty.
Adding to the controversy, Sarvajana Balavegaya’s Udaya Gammanpila alleged that the energy agreement was signed in English, Hindi, and Arabic—an unusual move that has raised eyebrows.
“What is the need for Hindi and Arabic in a bilateral deal between Sri Lanka and India?” Gammanpila raised alarm bells at a press conference. The government has not yet responded to his claims.
Sources close to former President Ranil Wickremesinghe suggest President Dissanayake’s government is delaying disclosure due to fears of a public backlash ahead of the May 6, 2025, local elections.
Analysts say the deals—likely involving energy, infrastructure, health, defence and trade—could become a political liability if perceived as favouring India too heavily.
“The government is walking a tightrope,” a political insider said. “They know these agreements could trigger protests if seen undermining sovereignty.”
With opposition pressure growing and public trust eroding, the government faces a critical choice: release the agreements, risk political fallout, or continue the secrecy and fuel further distrust.
