Transparency and accountability in disaster relief: A new era after decades of misuse

SRI Lanka today faces another devastating national tragedy, with Cyclone Ditwah leaving a trail of destruction—loss of lives, missing persons, displaced families, damaged homes, destroyed businesses, and ruined public infrastructure.

- By Prof. Asoka S. Seneviratne

Sri Lanka Navy on Sunday rescued 157 persons affected by flooding in the Illuppukadavai and Settikulam areas of Mannar, following heavy rainfall

Yet this moment of national distress has also revealed something fundamentally different: a Government that places transparency, accountability, and public trust at the centre of its disaster-relief efforts.

The Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MOFED), together with the President’s Media Division (PMD), has issued clear, comprehensive, and fully transparent instructions on how international and local contributions must be made. This sharp clarity of purpose stands in direct, profound contrast to one of the darkest episodes in Sri Lanka’s administrative history—the period following the 2004 tsunami. Then, the nation was not merely struck by a natural disaster but was subsequently wounded by an unprecedented governance disaster.

This article examines, contrasts, and highlights the radical shift between the scrupulous and accountable conduct of the present Government and the profoundly unscrupulous, opaque, and politically exploitative behaviour of the administration during the tsunami period. The differences are not minor. They define the kind of nation Sri Lanka aspires to be: one that learns from history rather than repeats it.

When the tsunami struck in December 2004, the world rallied around Sri Lanka with immense generosity—billions of US Dollars or rupees in financial contributions, shipments of humanitarian goods, reconstruction pledges, and emergency assistance. But the Government’s response at the time was anything but honourable.

There was no centralised mechanism for receiving funds. Various ministries, politicians, district offices, private accounts, NGOs, and even individuals began collecting funds without unified oversight. As a result: