Explore landmark RTI cases in Sri Lanka and how the courts have interpreted the Right to Information Act.
Since the enactment of the Right to Information Act No. 12 of 2016, Sri Lankan courts have increasingly played a major role in defining the scope of transparency, accountability, and the public’s constitutional right to access information under Article 14A of the Constitution.
From disputes involving public examinations and university answer scripts to cases concerning government accountability, competitive examinations, and access to official records, the judiciary has repeatedly been called upon to balance transparency against claims of confidentiality and administrative privilege.
Several landmark decisions delivered by the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal now serve as important authorities on how the Right to Information Act should be interpreted and applied in Sri Lanka. These cases not only shape public administration and institutional accountability, but have also become increasingly important for law students, researchers, journalists, and legal professionals seeking to understand the evolving RTI framework in Sri Lanka.
This article examines some of the most significant RTI cases in Sri Lanka and the legal principles established by the courts.
Asia Broadcasting Corporation (Hiru TV) vs. M.J.K. Dissanayake
A Landmark Right to Information case law on media accountability in Sri Lanka.
The decision in Asia Broadcasting Corporation (Pvt) Ltd v. M.J.K. Dissanayake and Others (Court of Appeal, 2026) marks an important development in Sri Lanka’s Right to Information (RTI) jurisprudence. The case addresses a critical question:
Can a private television broadcaster be considered a “public authority” under the Right to Information Act?
The Open University of Sri Lanka and others vs The Right to Information Commission and others
In a significant decision on transparency and students’ rights, the Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka reaffirmed that public universities cannot refuse access to answer scripts merely by claiming confidentiality.
The case, The Open University of Sri Lanka v. Right to Information Commission and Others, dealt with an important question increasingly raised in modern education systems: does a student have the right to see how their examination paper was evaluated?
Sri Lanka Telecom PLC v Right to Information Commission and C. J. Wijayawardhana
Can state institutions hide legal fees? Court says public money must remain open to scrutiny.
The case, Sri Lanka Telecom PLC v Right to Information Commission and C. J. Wijayawardhana, arose from an information request seeking a breakdown of legal costs spent by Sri Lanka Telecom PLC in several proceedings before the Right to Information Commission. The judgment delivered a strong message on transparency, accountability, and the public’s right to know how state-linked institutions spend public funds.
Vice Admiral Priyantha Perera, Commander, Sri Lanka Navy v. A.A.M.R. Ali and Others
Can the navy hide public spending? Court says RTI cannot be blocked by vague ‘National Security’ claims.
Landmark Sri Lankan RTI Cases explained.
In a landmark ruling on transparency and government accountability, the Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka held that the Sri Lanka Navy could not refuse to disclose information relating to the expenses incurred in transporting former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa aboard a naval vessel during the political crisis of July 2022.
The judgment addressed a growing tension within modern democracies: where should courts draw the line between national security and the public’s right to know? While the Navy argued that releasing operational expenditure details could indirectly expose sensitive military capabilities, the Court ultimately concluded that such claims must be supported by real evidence and not mere speculation.
The decision strongly reaffirmed that access to information is a constitutional right in Sri Lanka and that public authorities cannot rely on broad assertions of secrecy to avoid accountability.