Need for a swift deliverance of justice 

The death of former SriLankan Airlines CEO Kapila Chandrasena has once again exposed the grave weaknesses in Sri Lanka’s justice system in its inability to investigate and prosecute major corruption cases with urgency, professionalism, and finality. Chandrasena, a central figure in the controversial Airbus aircraft procurement scandal, died before the courts could conclusively determine the truth behind allegations. His death leaves not only unanswered questions, but also a troubling sense that justice delayed may once again become justice denied.

The Airbus deal remains one of the most emblematic corruption scandals in the country’s recent history. Allegations surrounding the procurement of aircraft for SriLankan Airlines suggested that millions of dollars in bribes were paid to secure a deal for 14 aircraft that far exceeded the country’s financial capacity. International investigations later revealed that Airbus had admitted to widespread bribery practices in several countries, including Sri Lanka. Reports indicated that approximately $ 16 million had been channelled as bribes connected to the transaction. To make matters worse, when a later government sought to cancel aspects of the deal, the country reportedly incurred penalties amounting to nearly $ 98 million.

This case represent public money squandered in a nation that would eventually descend into economic collapse, sovereign default, and bankruptcy in 2022. At a time when ordinary citizens struggled to afford fuel, medicine, and food, revelations of alleged corruption on such a scale became symbolic of the culture of impunity that many Sri Lankans believe drove the country toward ruin.

Central to the controversy were statements made by Chandrasena himself. A few weeks ago, it was stated in court that he had alleged that former President Mahinda Rajapaksa had received Rs. 60 million from the bribes connected to the Airbus transaction. However, Chandrasena later withdrew this statement through his lawyers, claiming it had been made under duress before the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption. Whether the original allegation was true, false, coerced, or politically manipulated may now never be fully known.

That uncertainty is precisely why the failure to conclude such investigations expeditiously is so dangerous. A prosecution involving allegations of international bribery, public corruption, and the misuse of billions in state funds should never have dragged on for years. Cases of this magnitude demand urgency not merely because of public interest, but because justice itself becomes increasingly fragile with time. Witnesses die, memories fade, evidence deteriorates, and political narratives begin to overshadow facts.

The renewed effort by authorities to confront corruption is both necessary and welcome. Sri Lankans are justified in demanding accountability from those who abused public office or enriched themselves at the expense of the nation. The collapse of public trust in political institutions did not occur overnight. It was built over decades of opaque deals, selective law enforcement, and the perception that the politically connected remained beyond the reach of the law.

Kapila Chandrasena’s death should be a reminder that justice delayed does not simply weaken accountability, but it can erase the possibility of truth altogether. If Sri Lanka is serious about confronting the corruption that contributed to its national crisis, then reforming the pace and integrity of its legal institutions can no longer be postponed. The country must prove that even in politically explosive cases, justice will not be determined by delay, power, or circumstance, but by the rule of law.