Court rules Devalaya funds subject to public scrutiny under RTI

Colombo, April 7 (Daily Mirror) - The Court of Appeal has ruled that funds held by Devalayas cannot be treated as private accounts and must be open to public scrutiny, reinforcing the principles of transparency and accountability in the management of religious institutions.

The judgment was delivered in respect of an appeal filed by the People’s Bank challenging a directive issued by the Right to Information Commission.

The Commission had ordered the bank to release information relating to two accounts maintained by the Devinuwara Uthpalawanna Sri Vishnu Maha Dewalaya.

The request for information was made by Ramakrishna Thenabadu, a former Kapurala of the Devalaya, who sought details of the accounts in February 2024. The Bank’s Information Officer and Designated Officer rejected the request, citing that the information constituted personal data of a third party. This position was supported by the Basnayake Nilame of the Devalaya, who formally objected to the disclosure. 

Following the refusal, the applicant appealed to the RTI Commission, which, after conducting hearings, issued a determination on December 12, 2024, directing the bank to provide the requested information. The Bank subsequently challenged this decision before the Court of Appeal, arguing that the Commission had erred in law by failing to recognise the Devalaya as a “third party” under the Right to Information Act and by not establishing sufficient public interest to override privacy concerns.

The bank further contended that the Commission’s directive was in conflict with the Banking Act, which imposes a fiduciary duty of confidentiality between banks and their customers, warning that disclosure would result in “grave and irreparable loss.”

However, the Court of Appeal dismissed the bank’s appeal, affirming the Commission’s determination. Delivering the judgment, Justice Sumudu Premachandra, with Justice Justice R. Gurusinghe agreeing, held that there was no basis to overturn the Commission’s findings.

The Court emphasised that under Section 4 of the Right to Information Act, its provisions take precedence over conflicting laws, including Section 77(1) of the Banking Act. It further underscored that the right to information is constitutionally guaranteed under Article 14A of the Constitution.

Justice Premachandra observed that under the Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance, the Basnayake Nilame acts as a trustee responsible for managing temple property, income, and maintenance. Given recent scrutiny over the misuse of such funds, the Court stressed that transparency cannot be compromised by withholding information. 

Counsel Kapila Liyanagamage instructed by Deepika Pramadasa appeared for the public authority while Counsel Reshaal Serasinghe with Shiara Sellamuthu appeared for the appellant.