Disaster response: Govt. rejects calls for parliamentary comm.
Govt. acted in accordance with disaster management protocols: Wijepala Asserting that the Government acted fully in accordance with established disaster management protocols following the warning issued on 25 November, Minister of Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs Ananda Wijepala yesterday (13) rejected Opposition calls for a parliamentary committee.
He emphasized that alerts issued on 12 and 18 November had not materialized into a cyclone and only pointed to the possibility of a low-pressure system or depression.
The Minister maintained that those earlier warnings could not have warranted the same level of emergency response that was activated after the confirmed warning on 25 November.Responding to questions raised by The Sunday Morning, Wijepala said: “I do not see any necessity for appointing a separate parliamentary committee to examine disaster management structures, because this demand is politically motivated and comes at a time when the entire country recognizes that we have faced floods and landslides on an unprecedented scale.” “While I cannot predict what the Government’s final position will be, my personal view is that an additional oversight body will not meaningfully improve the response to such disasters,” he added.
Defending the Government against allegations of negligence, he said: “What we experienced was a natural disaster of a magnitude rarely seen in Sri Lanka. It is important to note that the alerts on 12 and 18 November ultimately did not develop into a cyclone, whereas the warning issued at 10 a.m. on 25 November proved accurate. It immediately prompted the activation of all relevant disaster response mechanisms in line with established procedures.”
Wijepala further said that once the 25 November warning had been received, the Government had moved swiftly and strictly in conformity with protocol.
He noted that the Disaster Management Centre (DMC), Irrigation Department, Police, armed forces, and other relevant agencies coordinated closely to disseminate warnings and prepare for emergency response. “Public announcements urging evacuation were issued at least three times. Mobile phone alerts were sent to residents in high-risk areas when rainfall exceeded critical thresholds, and Police officers were deployed on the ground to directly notify communities. The landslides began on the night of 26 November,” he pointed out.
Referring to the impact on communities, the Minister said: “From what I personally observed in Nikaweratiya in the Kurunegala District, the scale of rainfall and destruction was unlike anything we have experienced in recent memory, and official data clearly shows that around 95% of the recorded fatalities were caused by landslides, with comparatively fewer deaths resulting from floods or falling trees, which indicates that greater compliance with evacuation advice in identified high-risk areas could have significantly reduced the loss of life.” He further noted that the National Building Research Organization (NBRO) had reported landslides occurring in locations not previously identified on hazard maps, underscoring the evolving and unpredictable nature of the disaster. Wijepala said this had exposed fundamental limitations in Sri Lanka’s disaster preparedness framework, which remained largely reactive in design, and pointed out that the early warning systems currently in use were mostly acquired after the 2004 tsunami and were now in urgent need of technological upgrading.
Emphasizing the limits of forecasting, he said that an early warning, by its very nature, signaled that a disaster may occur and not that it would occur with certainty. “When hundreds of lives are lost within a short period, it painfully underscores the limits of forecasting and response mechanisms, especially when some residents refuse to evacuate despite repeated advisories and clear risks to their lives,” he added.Turning to political criticism, Wijepala charged that the Opposition was attempting to capitalize on this disaster for political advantage, because when the Government carried out its responsibilities properly, the Opposition struggled to find substantive grounds for criticism.
“They instead exploit natural calamities to remain relevant, whether through calls for select committees or threats of negligence-related legal action. The President has openly challenged them to pursue legal action if they genuinely believe there is a basis for such claims. Let them try,” he challenged.
Acknowledging imperfections, the Minister said: “No system or strategy is perfect and we are ordinary individuals working within the constraints of available information and resources. While forecasts predicted rainfall of between 100 and 200 millimeters, some areas recorded more than 400 millimeters. With better predictive data certain decisions might have been taken differently, but based on the information available at the time the Government did the best it could in accordance with established procedures.”
