The government’s decision to purchase four surveillance drones from Israel for the Sri Lanka Air Force at a cost of Rs. 4.261 billion (Rs. 4,261 million) has become the subject of intense political debate, both inside and outside Parliament. Opposition members have raised allegations that the deal, which is being carried out without an open tender process, is driven by the interests of US intelligence agencies. There is also growing controversy surrounding the approval granted by the Parliamentary Committee on Public Finance (COPF).
The Serious Allegations Made by Rauff Hakeem
Speaking during the parliamentary Budget Debate on 14 November 2026, Rauff Hakeem, Leader of the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress, raised several serious questions regarding the transaction.
He questioned why the government had rushed into purchasing these drones from Israel without inviting competitive bids.
Hakeem stated that he suspected the drones were being purchased to monitor the movement of Iranian vessels and provide intelligence gathered through such surveillance to the United States. He questioned whether the government was preparing to use the Sri Lanka Navy and Air Force to conduct surveillance on behalf of the Americans. He also raised concerns about the possibility of commissions being exchanged in connection with the deal.
COPF Approval and Harsha de Silva’s Role
The supplementary estimate relating to this project was passed in Parliament on 5 November 2026, following approval by the Committee on Public Finance (COPF), chaired by Dr. Harsha de Silva.
As a result, the question of whether Harsha de Silva, in his capacity as Chairman of the committee, facilitated this transaction as part of an alleged “American deal” has become a subject of discussion on social media and political platforms.
Under parliamentary procedures, supplementary estimates submitted by the government are subject to scrutiny by the Committee on Public Finance before being presented to Parliament. The committee’s role is to examine whether the proposed allocation of funds complies with the applicable financial regulations.
In this instance, rather than allocating additional funds from the Treasury, the government has decided to utilise savings from the Sri Lanka Air Force’s helicopter maintenance expenditure under Financial Regulation 66 (FR 66).
Although Harsha has stated that the approval was granted on this basis, questions have also emerged within the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) itself about whether his recent visit to the United States was connected to discussions surrounding this matter.
The Government’s Position
Rejecting the opposition’s allegations, Deputy Minister of Defence Major General (Retired) Aruna Jayasekara has informed Parliament that the purchase is entirely based on Sri Lanka’s national security and disaster management requirements.
The government maintains that the drones, which are to be purchased through Israel’s BlueBird Aero Systems, will be used to monitor Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which covers approximately 517,000 square kilometres — around 27 times the country’s land area.
According to the government, the drones will be used to:
- Monitor Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone.
- Identify suspicious vessels operating in Sri Lankan waters.
- Locate missing fishermen.
- Support disaster relief operations during floods, cyclones and other natural disasters.
Final Analysis: Will Harsha Provide Answers Tomorrow?
When public funds amounting to Rs. 4.26 billion are being spent, the government’s decision to bypass the open tender process and adopt an emergency procurement procedure raises legitimate questions about transparency and accountability.
Both the government and the Parliamentary Committee on Public Finance have a responsibility to provide the public with a clear and transparent explanation of the circumstances surrounding this transaction.
Furthermore, regarding the alleged allocation of Rs. 100 million to Sirasa, the SJB Working Committee has reportedly instructed Harsha de Silva to summon representatives of Sirasa and officials from the Ministry of Tourism before the Committee on Public Finance.
Will Harsha address these two matters during his parliamentary speech tomorrow?
Providing answers to these questions is Harsha de Silva’s responsibility.