Last week, the Auditor General published a report concerning the numerous irregularities in tsunami reconstruction, rehabilitation and fund management. Covering the period from December 2004 to June 2005, the document is an interim report on post-tsunami activities and was presented to the Sri Lankan parliament.
The media has commented on the tough stance taken by the report, which among other things, highlights the lack of records on the collection of aid money from individuals and institutions, as well as the absence of any government scheme for the utilization of this money. The report further notes the irregular distribution of funds; in one divisional secretariat where 599 families had been recorded as being affected by the tsunami, 15,843 families received assistance.
In any other circumstances such a report would lead to inquiries about who is accountable for the misuse of funds, followed by measures to recover lost funds and prosecute those responsible. In Sri Lanka however, no such action has yet been contemplated. Similarly, the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is unaware of any such action being contemplated in the recent allegation of massive fraud at the Inland Revenue Department, where Rs. 3,570,000 (US $ 35,700 million) was reported to be misappropriated. While the Auditor Generals department has documented this incident as well, its report has not yet been made public.
The Auditor Generals department is a vital part of the government machinery dealing with government expenditure and finances. Its reports should thus be used to measure the financial performance of the government as well as the credibility of state institutions and personnel. There is a significant link between the use of such reports and the prevalence of the rule of law within the country. Where the rule of law prevails, such reports will lead to inquiries by the criminal investigation department, the parliament, and other relevant agencies. Where there is an absence of the rule of law, the criminal investigation and other authoritative bodies will overlook revelations of possible fraud, rendering any such reports by the Auditor General or others as worthless.
In many Asian countries issues of corruption and fraud are also investigated by specific anti-corruption agencies. In Sri Lanka, this would be the Commission on Bribery and Corruption, which however, is largely ineffective. According to a former chairman of the Commission, its investigative machinery is drawn from the police. It does not have adequate personnel, equipment or competence to deal with any significant frauds such as those mentioned earlier. It is thus essential for such an agency to have its own staff and resources to function effectively as well as independently. That this situation does not exist in Sri Lanka implies a covert acceptance of corrupt practices, which will render attempts to expose fraud as symbolic gestures with no radical implications. Without strong institutions to challenge these practices, there is also little possibility of constructive development taking place within the country. Large amounts of money that could be used for development purposes are either misappropriated for private purposes or remain unused due to a dysfunctional system.
The current situation in Sri Lanka has further led to a paralysis of public interest and opinion. It is essential to cure this paralysis; a public discussion on the prevention of corruption is necessary in addressing other rule of law issues within the country. The AHRC therefore urges all concerned citizens to take up the Auditor Generals reports on the mismanagement of tsunami funds as well as the Inland Revenue Department fraud, and begin to address the corruption prevailing throughout government agencies and elsewhere.
