Enforcement delay: A test of credibility for Sri Lanka’s tourism regulator

SLTDA Chairman 

Buddhika Hewawasam

On 22 July 2025, the Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority (SLTDA) gave an undertaking before the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka (SC/FR/63/2023) to recruit and operationalise a Special Enforcement Unit within three months to act against unregistered, unlicenced tour guides and operators. The commitment was clear: existing law would be enforced. 

The SLTDA Chairman Buddhika Hewawasam, thereafter reiterated in an article published in the Daily Mirror on 19 October 2025 that SLTDA was in the process of establishing the Special Enforcement Unit, which would be operational within three months to apprehend those committing offences. This was a significant and long-overdue step toward addressing the persistent problem of unregistered establishments and individuals unlawfully providing tourism services in violation of the Tourism Act No. 38 of 2005. 

Months later, despite these public assurances and the undertaking given to the Supreme Court, the Enforcement Unit has yet to be fully operational. Meanwhile, unauthorised operators continue to function openly, placing licenced tour guides and compliant businesses at a serious disadvantage during the peak tourist season. 

The explanation now offered for the delay is that legal consultations on a proposed new Tourism Act are ongoing. On that basis, instead of complying with the undertaking given to the Supreme Court, the SLTDA is deferring the operationalisation of the Enforcement Unit until those consultations are concluded, a process that is said to be at least six months from completion. 

It has already taken many years, and ultimately legal action by the Sri Lanka Institute of National Tourist Guide Lecturers (SLINTGL), for the SLTDA to formally commit to enforcing the law. Having given that undertaking before the Supreme Court, it cannot now retreat from implementation. Moreover, during the peak tourist season, when unlawful operators are most active and the harm to licensed guides and compliant businesses is greatest, enforcement should be strengthened, not deferred. 

Foreign exchange revenue and enforcement

Some opponents of stronger enforcement argue that relaxing regulation could help boost foreign exchange earnings. This view is misguided. Allowing unlicenced businesses and unregistered service providers to operate freely risks lowering service standards, undermining visitor safety, and damaging Sri Lanka’s hard-earned reputation as a quality destination. Over time, this can erode traveller confidence. Such thinking is especially naïve at a time when Sri Lanka faces intense competition from other destinations. 

Moreover, this issue goes beyond enforcement alone. Responsible businesses depend on clear rules that are applied consistently and fairly. If even commitments made before the Supreme Court not honoured, how can law-abiding businesses, or the public, have confidence that institutions will respect and uphold the rule of law? The credibility of the regulatory system depends on even-handed enforcement, without favour or exception. 

Sri Lanka’s tourism industry cannot grow on a foundation of selective enforcement for the benefit of the few, and at the expense of the industry’s success. If the country is serious about building a sustainable, high-quality tourism sector, the rules must be upheld, not postponed. 

(The author is a National Tour Guide and former Secretary of Sri Lanka Institute of National Tourist Guide Lecturers)