By The Pulseline News Desk
The Right to Information (RTI) Commission has ruled that a private bank operating under a licence issued by the Monetary Board of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) falls within the definition of a “public authority” under the Right to Information Act, No. 12 of 2016.
The decision, delivered on October 21, 2026, arose from an appeal by Udara Ranasinghe, a customer of SANASA Development Bank PLC (SDB Bank), who had sought information on the review of the interest rate applicable to his loan.
The ruling has addressed the applicability of the RTI Act to private banking institutions and their obligations under the legislation when responding to requests for information.
Ranasinghe had requested information from SDB Bank regarding the review of his loan interest rate. Although the bank had responded by email on April 9, 2025, he was dissatisfied with the response and subsequently appealed to the RTI Commission.
During the appeal proceedings, SDB Bank had maintained that it had provided information to the customer on four occasions through email correspondence. However, the bank had also argued that it did not qualify as a public authority under the RTI Act because it had been incorporated under the Companies Act, No. 7 of 2007.
The Commission had rejected the bank’s position on its status under the RTI Act.
In its decision in Appeal No. RTC/Appeal/1005/2025, the Commission had held that a private bank operating under a licence issued by the Monetary Board of the CBSL falls within the statutory definition of a public authority.
Section 3(1) of the RTI Act has established the right of every citizen, subject to the exemptions provided under Section 5, to access information held by, in the possession of, or under the control of a public authority.
Section 43 has defined the term “public authority”, with paragraph (e) covering specified private entities and organisations subject to the conditions set out in the legislation.
The Commission’s ruling has clarified how the definition applies to a private bank operating under a licence issued by the Monetary Board, establishing that its incorporation under company law does not, in itself, exclude it from the scope of the RTI Act.
The decision was delivered by RTI Commission Chairman Dayaratne Lankapura and Commissioners Attorney-at-Law Kishali Pinto Jayawardena and A. Mohomed Nahiya.
Attorney-at-Law Manoja Gunawardana, accompanied by Himashi Kumaratunga, had appeared for the appellant. Attorney-at-Law K.D. Premaratne, accompanied by B.M.P. Nayanathara, had represented SDB Bank.
Leave a comment