Vinivida Foundation Calls on CIABOC to Investigate Circumstances Behind Gotabaya's 2019 Presidential Nomination

The Vinivida Foundation, a local non-governmental organisation, has formally requested the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) to launch an inquiry into the roles allegedly played by former Election Commission Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya and senior attorney Ali Sabry, PC, in facilitating former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's nomination for the 2019 presidential election.

Background to the Request

The NGO's petition centres on questions surrounding how Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who held dual Sri Lankan and United States citizenship at the time, was permitted to contest the November 2019 presidential poll. Critics have long argued that the process through which his candidacy was approved warrants closer scrutiny by independent authorities.

Key Figures Named in the Complaint

The Vinivida Foundation has specifically named two individuals in its submission to CIABOC:

• Mahinda Deshapriya — who served as Chairman of the Election Commission during the period in which the nomination was processed and accepted.
• Ali Sabry, PC — a prominent attorney who later served as Sri Lanka's Finance Minister, and who the Foundation alleges played a role in enabling the nomination process.

Call for Accountability

The foundation's move reflects growing civil society pressure for greater transparency and accountability regarding key decisions made in the lead-up to the 2019 election. By directing the complaint to CIABOC, the organisation is seeking an independent and formal investigation into whether any corrupt or improper conduct influenced the nomination outcome.

CIABOC, established under Sri Lankan law as the primary body mandated to investigate bribery and corruption allegations, has yet to publicly respond to the foundation's request. It remains to be seen whether the commission will proceed with a formal inquiry based on the submission.

The Vinivida Foundation has urged CIABOC to act swiftly and impartially in examining the circumstances surrounding one of Sri Lanka's most consequential presidential nominations in recent history.

The development adds another dimension to the ongoing public discourse surrounding the Rajapaksa political era and the institutional decisions that shaped it.