Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka’s state-media leadership turned over rapidly following Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s presidential election victory in September 2024. New chairmen were appointed at the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation, the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation and the Independent Television Network on 24 September. Gamini Warushamana assumed the chairmanship of the Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Limited on 25 September, while ITN records Priyantha Wedamulla formally assuming duties on 27 September. The National People’s Power government subsequently won 159 of the 225 seats in Parliament in the November 2024 election, comfortably exceeding the two-thirds threshold.

Leadership continued to evolve after that initial transition: SLRC’s September appointee resigned in December 2024 and was replaced by Gihan De Silva. Lankapuvath is currently chaired by Warushamana, who simultaneously serves as Chairman and Managing Director of ANCL. No public record was identified establishing the date or procedure of his Lankapuvath appointment. The evidence therefore demonstrates rapid politically aligned turnover across the four principal state-media companies, but does not support saying that the governing body of every mapped outlet was replaced within the same forty-eight-hour period.

Press-freedom organisations have continued to call for repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act and the Online Safety Act. In June 2026, the Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association called for the withdrawal of the proposed Chartered Institute of Media Professionals of Sri Lanka Bill, objecting to ministerial influence over its interim governing structure, regulation-making powers and disciplinary procedures. The bill was gazetted on 5 June and presented to Parliament on 22 July 2026.

The State Media Monitor maps five state-media organisations in Sri Lanka:

• Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation, television — Captured Public / State-Managed (CaPu);
• Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation, radio — Captured Public / State-Managed (CaPu);
• Independent Television Network, television and radio — Captured Public / State-Managed (CaPu);
• Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Limited, newspapers — Captured Public / State-Managed (CaPu);
• Lankapuvath, national news agency — State-Controlled (SC).

In SMM’s 2026 coding, the distinction between the four CaPu organisations and Lankapuvath lies in the funding indicator. All five meet the governance- and editorial-control conditions. The four CaPu outlets do not, on the presently available evidence, receive qualifying state support amounting to at least half of their annual resources. Lankapuvath is assessed as predominantly state-funded, although this finding rests on SMM interviews rather than published accounts or a separately identifiable budget allocation.

The financial evidence varies considerably in quality and form. SLRC’s 2024 accounts record no recurrent operating-subsidy line, although approximately LKR 73.35 million in capital-grant income was recognised. ITN reported total income of approximately LKR 1.959 billion and received LKR 109.95 million in government financing, equivalent to about 5.6% of that income; its accounts also recognised LKR 21.19 million through amortisation of government grants. SMM’s calculation from SLBC’s 2023 accounts places qualifying state finance at approximately 27% after counting a LKR 300 million Treasury transfer and recognised government-grant income. None of these figures reaches the Matrix’s 50% threshold.

ANCL’s funding position is less transparent. It received a one-off LKR 300 million government grant for a voluntary retirement programme in 2023 and benefits from state-advertising arrangements, but its published accounts do not disclose the proportion of advertising income derived from public institutions. Predominant state funding is therefore not demonstrated on the available evidence, rather than definitively ruled out.

The boundary between commercial and state funding is further complicated by official advertising. A Cabinet decision of 21 December 2021, cited in ANCL’s 2024 audit, instructed state and semi-state institutions to place their newspaper advertising with Lake House. It also required public institutions to allocate at least 25% of relevant wider media-advertising budgets collectively across Lake House, SLRC, ITN and SLBC. Under SMM methodology, state advertising constitutes direct state support even when an outlet records it as commercial advertising revenue. The published accounts do not separately disclose the value of these public advertising flows, preventing a complete calculation of the funding indicator.

The statutory frameworks are equally uneven. The Acts governing SLRC and SLBC contain formal requirements concerning accuracy, impartiality, balance and the public interest. Both, however, also provide channels for executive intervention: SLRC must comply with general or special ministerial directions, while SLBC must follow government broadcasting policy and ministerial directions issued pursuant to it. Formal impartiality obligations therefore coexist with binding executive powers.

ANCL’s 1973 Special Provisions Law contains the clearest express editorial limitation among the five mapped organisations. It permits the Public Trustee to direct the company’s board but excludes directions relating to editorial policy or the free expression of opinion. The provision is not supported by an independent enforcement body, protected editorial appointments or an external complaints mechanism, and has not prevented sustained findings of political influence over Lake House output.

ITN and Lankapuvath operate as companies rather than under dedicated founding statutes that prescribe public-service duties, editorial independence or political-balance obligations. No publicly accessible enforceable editorial charter, independent ombudsman or external mechanism capable of auditing editorial autonomy was identified at either organisation.

The resulting pattern is consistent across the sector. Sri Lanka’s state-media organisations differ in legal form and funding structure, but all remain governed through politically controlled appointments and all lack an independently enforceable editorial firewall. The four CaPu classifications reflect their predominantly commercial or insufficiently documented funding structures, not editorial independence. Lankapuvath’s State-Controlled classification rests on the additional finding that public subsidy supplies most of its budget, although that remains the least transparently documented funding assessment in the country.

Media profiles