By Adolf
In early 2026, allegations of a massive coal procurement scandal surfaced in Sri Lanka, centring on how the government awarded and managed a multi‑billion‑rupee tender for importing coal used at the Norochcholai (Lakvijaya) Coal Power Plant. What began as technical objections quickly snowballed into claims of corruption, financial mismanagement, and political misconduct — leaving the unity government on the defensive as criticscalled it one of the most damaging controversies of the current regime, a controversy analysts say has shattered what little confidence citizens had left in the current administration:
What Happened: The Coal Tender and Quality Issues
The dispute began over a government tender to import coal for power generation at Sri Lanka’s largest coal‑fired plant. Opposition lawmakers and analysts raised questions about the quality and calorific value of recent coal consignments, alleging that several shipments failed to meet the minimum technical specifications required for efficient electricity generation. According to Parliamentary members, laboratory tests confirmed that multiple imported coal batches were substandard, below the minimum energy output levels specified in the tender requirements.
Opposition leader Sajith Premadasa accused the government of “daylight robbery” and said the decision to import substandard coal had cost more than Rs. 8 billion — money that could otherwise have supported public services or kept electricity prices stable.
Even broader estimates shared in parliamentary discussions suggested losses approaching or exceeding Rs. 7.9 billion due to purchasing and using inferior coal across eight shipments.
Political Fallout and Accusations
The political backlash has been severe. Opposition MPs argued that the tender procedure was manipulated: they say deadlines were extended and eligibility criteria altered to favour a specific company, undermining competition and transparency. As pressure mounted, some lawmakers publicly challenged the Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody to defend his conduct and explain the procurement decisions, with one MP even calling for a televised debate over alleged corruption.
Party leaders and critics outside Parliament have taken an even harsher tone. Figures such as Wimal Weerawansa alleged that powerful individuals in the government — including senior ministers — influenced the tender process after overseas discussions with foreign suppliers, suggesting improper interference. These accusations have created the perception of political patronage and backroom deals, and even calls for the Energy Minister to resign or be removed.
Government Response
The government has denied any deliberate wrongdoing. Senior officials, including the Minister of Agriculture Lal Kantha, acknowledged that some coal consignments were of inferior quality but insisted that there was no corruption in how the tender was conducted. They argued that proper procurement procedures were used and that mechanisms exist to recover losses through penalties against the supplier. In fact, the government has levied millions of dollars in penalties on several substandard coal shipments — more than US$2 million on the first alone and smaller fines on subsequent batches. Officials maintain this shows they are acting within legal and contractual frameworks.
Analysts and Public Reaction
Despite governmental reassurances, analysts and opposition figures alike argue that the scandal has done enormous reputational damage. Critics claim that the crisis exposes deep flaws in procurement transparency and accountability — especially in a sector as vital as energy. For many Sri Lankans, the issue is more than technical procurement process debate; it symbolizes the broader problem of governance integrity. Observers have noted that a government that campaigned on promises of accountability and clean governance now finds itself defending against widespread corruption accusations.
Wider Economic Consequences
Beyond political embarrassment, the scandal has economic implications. Substandard coal reduces power generation efficiency, meaning the state must either import additional fuel or run more expensive alternatives like diesel plants to meet demand — costs eventually passed on to consumers. Opposition voices warn that continued losses or higher electricity tariffs could further strain household budgets and undermine public trust in the government’s ability to manage core services. In summary, the Sri Lankan coal controversy has escalated into a major political and economic crisis — one that analysts say has severely undermined the credibility of the current government. While calls for independent investigations and ministerial accountability are growing, public perception of governance and transparency remains deeply shaken. Unfortunately, due to the lacklustre leadership of the opposition, the scandal is unlikely to be fully leveraged politically. Meanwhile, surveys from Verité Research, led by Nishan de Mel, continue to produce findings that critics argue can be misleading — at times even confusing international observers like the IMF.