FT

New visa move in limbo amidst bureaucratic disputes

Wednesday, 4 September 2024 00:00 -     - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

 


 

  • Industry leaders charge some officials resorting to terrorism instead of promoting tourism

By Charumini de Silva

The highly beneficial free visa on arrival move championed by President Ranil Wickremesinghe appears to have hit a bureaucratic barrier yesterday causing concern and confusion within travel industry who charged some officials were resorting to terrorism instead of promoting tourism.

At a meeting chaired by the Secretary to the President Saman Ekanayake yesterday, the implementation of the revised visa policy which was expected to benefit 38 countries, hit a stumbling block due to bureaucratic disagreements and legal ambiguities.

The meeting, which included officials from various key agencies such as the Foreign Ministry, Tourism Ministry, Public Security Ministry, Attorney General’s Department, Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority, Sri Lanka Tourism Promotions Bureau, Department of Immigration and Emigration, SLT-Mobitel failed to reach consensus over the immediate implementation of the single-chop visa policy approved by the Cabinet of Ministers on Monday.

The Department of Immigration and Emigration Controller General Harsha Ilukpitiya reportedly have expressed reluctance to comply, citing unresolved issues and potential conflicts with existing regulations.

This resistance created confusion among industry stakeholders, whilst other departments including the SLTDA, SLT-Mobitel had shown willingness to proceed.

The Daily FT learns that given the dire need to ensure the winter bookings and to ease congestion at the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA), the SLT-Mobitel has offered to extend service with the Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) system for free-of-charge. However, the Controller General has disagreed with the proposal.

The core of the dispute lies in the interpretation of the Supreme Court’s directive to reactivate the ETA system that was operational prior to 17 April.

Immigration Controller General has reportedly argued that the existing procedural documents contradict the immediate activation of this system, causing a standoff that has yet to be resolved.

The Immigration Controller General has also faced criticism during the meeting with accusations of trying to delay the implementation by insisting that Parliamentary approval was necessary. This stance was perceived by some as an attempt to step aside the issue, especially since the previous Cabinet decision to activate the free-visa policy was made with adequate time for legislative adjustments, scheduled to take effect on 1 October.

It is learned that the Secretary to the President and other officials, attempted to persuade the DIE to proceed, stressing the urgency to reduce the congestion and enhance the tourist experience at airports. They had proposed immediate activation of all counters of the seven countries currently enjoying free visa access, while working towards expanding the facility to additional countries. 

However, these suggestions did not seem to sway the DIE Controller General, who maintained their position against immediate activation of the Cabinet decision.

The situation has also drawn the attention of foreign mission, which has reported an increase in inquiries about the status of Sri Lanka’s visa policies, leaving them unable to provide clear answers.

Separately, the industry associations voiced their frustration over the deadlock, asserting that the delay is likely costing the country valuable winter bookings and potential growth in foreign inflows.

They argued that a decisive directive from the President, who also holds the portfolios of the Tourism, Finance, Economic Stabilisation and National Policies, could cut through the bureaucratic red tape and align all parties in a common path forward.

“The President could either enforce the Supreme Court order to reintroduce the pre-17 April ETA system or alternatively, refrain from intervening citing the ongoing legal proceedings as justification,” they claimed.

COMMENTS