July 21, Colombo (LNW): Sri Lanka’s Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry probing coal procurement has been told that emergency purchasing has remained the country’s principal method of importing coal for more than a decade, raising further questions over long-term procurement practices.
Giving evidence before the Commission, Shashipraba Pathirage, Director of the Department of Public Finance at the Treasury, said emergency procurement had been widely used for coal imports since 2015 under a Cabinet-approved policy introduced that year. Patali Champika Ranawaka was serving as the Minister of Power and Energy when the relevant Cabinet memorandum was adopted.
Pathirage explained that the Department of Public Finance had, over the years, appointed a number of procurement bodies to oversee coal purchases, including Standing Procurement Committees, Technical Evaluation Committees and Bid Evaluation Committees. These committees were established under powers vested in the department to facilitate and supervise the procurement process.
During the hearing, members of the Commission questioned whether documentary evidence existed to show that coal imports had ever been carried out under a long-term procurement framework. In response, the Treasury official stated that no such records were available, indicating there was no documented evidence to confirm the use of long-term procurement arrangements for coal imports.
The Commission also heard that the Government Procurement Guidelines provide several purchasing methods for essential commodities, with emergency procurement being only one of the available options. Among the alternatives is long-term procurement, under which supply contracts can extend from one to three years or longer. Such agreements typically rely on an agreed pricing formula or fixed pricing mechanism, offering greater predictability and reducing the need for repeated emergency purchases despite fluctuations in international coal prices.
Pathirage further clarified that the Department of Public Finance does not directly procure coal but is responsible for establishing the legal and regulatory framework governing the process. Its functions include appointing procurement committees, issuing procurement guidelines and circulars, defining financial thresholds and delegating procurement authority to the relevant institutions.
Meanwhile, on the fifth day of proceedings, the Commission also heard evidence from Prabath Indika Prasanna, Head of the Policy Division of the National Procurement Commission. He explained that the Commission’s role is limited to developing, regulating and monitoring the procurement framework, and that it does not participate in the evaluation of bids or the approval of tenders for large-scale government purchases such as coal imports.
Prasanna also revealed that, following the controversial coal shipment at the centre of the inquiry, the National Procurement Commission had forwarded a series of recommendations to the Secretary of the Ministry of Energy. The recommendations were intended to strengthen procurement procedures and minimise the risk of similar disputes arising in future. He also outlined how the Commission periodically reviews and updates national procurement guidelines to improve transparency, accountability and efficiency in public sector purchasing.
