Normalisation of corruption: A crisis in leadership

The recent revelations at the 45th National Conference of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Sri Lanka have brought the normalisation of corruption in our country back into sharp focus. With three former presidents sharing the stage, their casual remarks and jokes about corruption served as a sobering reminder of how deeply entrenched this menace has become within the nation’s political and governance culture.

Former President Chandrika Kumaratunga, who arguably has the least allegations of corruption among the living former heads of State made a startling confession about being offered a $ 5 million bribe during her tenure as Prime Minister. She narrated how the husband of a junior minister in her Government offered her a bribe. Instead of treating it with the seriousness it deserves, the anecdote seemed to serve as entertainment, eliciting amusement from the audience as she told the ‘bribe giver’ to get out of her office. 

But beneath the humour lies a deeply troubling reality: offering and receiving bribes are both serious crimes. Yet, Kumaratunga’s response at the time was not to report this flagrant attempt of bribery, against the prime minister of the country, to the relevant authorities, but simply to dismiss the individual with a stern warning. The fact that such an individual (or his spouse) continued to function in her Government, probably for many years if not decades is of little consequence to the former president. Do we know what kind of financial fraud this individual may have continued to commit or the cost that was incurred due to this inaction?

Kumaratunga’s second revelation, concerning the transfer of over a billion dollars by the son of a politician to an account in Dubai in 2015, is equally concerning. While she claims that Sri Lanka’s laws at the time were not strong enough to repatriate the funds, this explanation glosses over the myriad of actions that could have been taken against the individual involved. At the very least, the Inland Revenue Department could have launched an investigation into the source of such immense wealth. The lack of sufficient laws for repatriation should not have served as an excuse for inaction on the broader issue of illicit wealth accumulation. This, too, speaks to a permissive culture where those with power and connections evade scrutiny, while corruption continues to fester unchecked.

The behaviour of Sri Lanka’s leaders, including former presidents such as Kumaratunga and Ranil Wickremesinghe, reflects a failure not only to tackle corruption but to recognise its corrosive effect on the nation’s institutions. Even if these leaders cannot be directly accused of accepting bribes, they have enabled corruption to thrive by turning a blind eye to it or trivialising it as part of the political game. Their inaction has created an environment where the rule of law is weakened, and accountability is selective. This normalisation of corruption is not a product of weak laws alone, but of weak leadership, where the will to combat corruption is repeatedly undermined by a culture of impunity.

When the highest offices in the land treat corruption as a laughing matter, it becomes impossible to foster the cultural shift necessary to eradicate it. Instead of dismissing or trivialising their own complicity, Sri Lanka’s leaders—past, present, and future—must start holding themselves and their peers to higher standards. Offering bribes, receiving bribes, and enabling others to accumulate ill-gotten wealth are crimes that erode the very foundations of democracy and trust in governance. It is time for Sri Lanka’s leadership to break the cycle of impunity, not with words or jokes, but with decisive and transparent action.