On December 4, 2024, revelations about the issuance of 361 liquor licenses by the Excise Department between January and October 2024 have ignited a major political scandal. Chief Government Whip Bimal Rathnayake disclosed these figures during a contentious parliamentary debate, alleging that the previous administration, led by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, used these licenses as political bribes to secure alliances and strengthen his coalition.
This controversy has drawn sharp criticism from opposition parties and civil society groups, becoming a flashpoint in the run-up to national elections.
Provincial Distribution of Liquor Licenses
Rathnayake presented data highlighting the uneven allocation of liquor licenses across provinces, which he claimed was evidence of political favoritism.
- The Western Province received the highest number of licenses (110), followed by the Southern Province (48) and Central Province (45).
- In contrast, the North Central Province received only 14 licenses, suggesting a skewed distribution based on political calculations.
A significant portion—172 licenses—fell under the FL-4 category, permitting the retail sale of liquor through wine stores. Rathnayake argued that these licenses were strategically issued to benefit politically significant regions and reward allies.
Allegations of Political Bribery
Rathnayake accused the Wickremesinghe administration of issuing liquor licenses not for economic development or tourism but as political bribes. These licenses, he alleged, were used to entice crossovers from opposition parties, thereby consolidating the government’s power.
“These licenses were not issued in the national interest but as tools for political manipulation. This reflects the prioritization of personal political gains over governance,” Rathnayake stated in Parliament.
Opposition Criticism and Election Implications
With elections looming, opposition parties have capitalized on the controversy to challenge the integrity of the previous administration. The National People's Power (NPP), positioning itself as a party committed to transparency, has vowed to investigate the scandal and reform systems marred by political interference if elected.
Critics have pointed out that the timing of the license issuance aligns suspiciously with political negotiations, reinforcing allegations of corruption. The opposition has framed the issue as emblematic of a broader governance failure under Wickremesinghe’s leadership.
Public Backlash
The controversy has provoked outrage among civil society organizations and voter rights groups, who have condemned the alleged misuse of state mechanisms for political gain.
They argue that the mass issuance of liquor licenses not only reflects corruption but also exacerbates social challenges such as alcoholism. Public frustration over the scandal underscores growing demands for accountability and systemic reform in governance.
The Broader Impact on Governance
This scandal has reignited longstanding criticisms of governance in Sri Lanka, where allegations of favoritism and corruption have frequently dominated political discourse.
- Calls for Investigation: Civil society groups and opposition parties have demanded a full investigation into the criteria used for license issuance and the identities of beneficiaries.
- Focus on Reform: The issue has strengthened the NPP’s anti-corruption platform, positioning it as a key election theme.
Conclusion
The liquor license controversy has become a critical talking point ahead of Sri Lanka’s upcoming elections, shaping public perceptions of governance and accountability. As opposition parties leverage the issue to criticize the previous administration, voters are likely to scrutinize the government’s record on corruption and transparency.
The fallout from this scandal
underscores the urgent need for systemic reforms to restore public trust and
prevent the misuse of state mechanisms for political ends. How the government
addresses these allegations and ensures accountability will have a lasting
impact on Sri Lanka’s political and electoral landscape.
No comments