Court of Appeal quashes RTI order against Central Bank’s Monetary Board

By Lakmal Sooriyagoda 

The Court of Appeal has set aside a 2018 order issued by the Right to Information Commission against the Monetary Board of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, ruling that the commission had exceeded its statutory powers under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

Delivering the judgment, a bench comprising Justice R. Gurusinghe and Justice M.C.B.S. Morais, held that the commission erred in concluding that the public interest in disclosure outweighed the potential harm arising from releasing the requested information.

The court observed that while the RTI Commission is empowered to direct the public authorities to disclose information, such authority is subject to the limitations set out in Section 5 of the RTI Act. The bench emphasised that the information sought in this case fell squarely within the exemption provided under Section 5(1)(d) and therefore could not be ordered to be disclosed.

“The RTI Commission has exceeded the scope of its powers under the RTI Act and has overridden the statutory exemption,” the court held, noting that the commission lacked the legal authority to compel disclosure of the exempted information.

The case originated from the requests filed by Verité Research (Pvt.) Ltd in May 2017, under Section 24 of the RTI Act, seeking a range of information from departments of the Central Bank, including the Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF) Department and Public Debt Department.

While part of the request submitted to the Public Debt Department was resolved prior to adjudication, the EPF-related request remained disputed. In June 2017, the Central Bank, through its Information Officer, agreed to release certain information but declined to disclose other items, citing statutory exemptions.

In particular, the Monetary Board stated that it could only provide a list of EPF investments as at December 31, 2016, noting that more recent data was provisional and subject to audit. It also refused to release information under Item No. 6, maintaining that such material fell within the exempted categories under Section 5(1) of the RTI Act.

Following this refusal, Verité Research appealed to the Central Bank’s Designated Officer, the Governor, under Section 31 of the act. The appeal was rejected in September 2017. Subsequently, the think tank escalated the matter to the RTI Commission under Section 32. In its November 2018 determination, the RTI Commission held that several exemptions cited by the Monetary Board—including Sections 5(1)(a), 5(1)(d), 5(1)(h) and 5(1)(i)—were not applicable and directed the disclosure of specified details relating to Item No. 6, particularly for the years 2015 and 2016.

However, the Court of Appeal has now overturned that directive, reaffirming that the statutory exemptions under the RTI framework must be strictly observed and cannot be overridden on a general assessment of public interest.

Dr. Kanag Isvaran, PC, with Shivan Kanag Isvaran, instructed by Sudath Perera Associates, appeared for the substituted public authority-petitioner, Dr. G. Gunatilleke, with Oshan Fernando and Avishka Jayaweera, appeared for the appellant-respondent.