In a striking move that has captured national attention, Sri Lanka’s Parliament voted 151 to 1 to abolish most of the state-funded perks once enjoyed by former presidents and their families. The decision, finalised in September 2025, revokes decades-old privileges tied to the presidency — including official residences, transport, staff offices, and allowances — leaving only a constitutionally protected pension intact. Parliament Lanka+2News365.lk+2
This legislative overhaul is more than symbolic. It represents a sharp break from a political tradition of elites retaining luxurious benefits well after their terms end, signaling a new era of fiscal responsibility, political accountability, and populist reform under the current government.
Power, People, and Price Tags
At the heart of this reform is a stark message: the privileges of former presidents are no longer a given. For years, ex-presidents lived in state-provided mansions, traveled in government vehicles, and received generous secretarial support. These perks were enshrined in the Presidents’ Entitlements Act No. 4 of 1986, which guaranteed a lifetime of benefits for ex-leaders and, in some cases, their widows. Parliament Lanka+1
But that chapter has ended. The Presidents’ Entitlements (Repeal) Act No. 18 of 2025, which formally repealed the 1986 law, was passed in Parliament with overwhelming support. Parliament Lanka Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara, speaking for the government, emphasized that abolishing these privileges is a core part of its broader fiscal reform agenda. The Week+1
A Reform Rooted in Public Sentiment
The decision did not come out of the blue. In the aftermath of Sri Lanka’s devastating economic crisis, public anger over wasteful spending and political excess has only intensified. Many citizens blamed elite figures — including former presidents — for contributing to the nation’s financial collapse. News365.lk
The current government, led by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, made the repeal of presidential perks a key campaign pledge. He argued that maintaining state-funded residences and staff for former presidents was an unjust drain on public resources — especially at a time when many Sri Lankans are struggling economically. The Week
With this vote, the government is not just making good on its promise; it is reshaping the narrative of governance, suggesting that public service should not translate into lifelong personal privileges.
Legal Hurdles and Constitutional Debate
Repealing such entrenched entitlements was not without legal challenges. The Supreme Court reviewed petitions filed by former presidents and political opponents, many questioning whether Parliament could simply remove these rights without a popular referendum. Ada Derana
Critics argued that entitlements like housing, transport, and staff are part of the dignity of the presidential office and should not be stripped lightly. But the court sided with the government: the repeal did not violate the Constitution, and Parliament could enact it with a simple majority. www.ndtv.com This decision cleared the way for swift legislative action.
What’s Being Cut — and What Remains
Under the new repeal law:
- Official residences provided to former presidents and their spouses will be withdrawn. Parliament Lanka
- Secretarial allowances, transport facilities, and dedicated staff are eliminated. Parliament Lanka+1
- Monthly allowances tied to entitlements under the old act are gone. News365.lk
- However, pensions remain. Because retirement pensions for former presidents are constitutionally protected, the repeal could not remove this benefit. News365.lk+1
In short: the government has pulled back nearly all tangible privileges, but has preserved a base-level financial safety net.
Political and Symbolic Implications
The move carries strong political symbolism. For the ruling party, it’s a demonstration of seriousness — that power will not mean lifetime excess. For ordinary citizens, it is a message that the state’s resources are being re-evaluated, and that political office should not guarantee privilege forever.
At the same time, some analysts warn that while this is an important reform, the fiscal savings may be more symbolic than transformative. Reports suggest that annual spending on former-presidential perks was sizable but not crippling in comparison to the overall national budget. News365.lk
Still, the repeal may have ripple effects: it could set a precedent for further reforms, encouraging the government to tackle other entrenched privileges in public life.
Real-World Impact: What Former Presidents Face Now
For former presidents, there are immediate consequences. Mahinda Rajapaksa, for example, now faces vacating his official residence in Colombo — a sprawling mansion once maintained at enormous public cost. Tamil Guardian His supporters have reportedly already begun scouting for a new official home to host his public engagements.
Former presidents Maithripala Sirisena and Chandrika Kumaratunga are also expected to give up their government-provided homes. The Week Meanwhile, Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Ranil Wickremesinghe were not residing in state houses to begin with, making the law’s impact on them more financial than residential. News365.lk
The Road Ahead: Accountability or Populism?
The repeal is part of a broader trend under the current administration — an effort to reduce elite privileges, promote austerity, and restore public trust. Critics say it’s a populist move: high in symbolism, but limited in actual fiscal reform. News365.lk They argue that deeper structural issues — such as corruption, institutional inefficiency, and inequality — require more than just removing perks.
Supporters believe this is a signal of a changing political culture, where entitlement is no longer automatic and power is more closely tied to performance.
A New Chapter in Governance
With this law now in effect, Sri Lanka has taken a stand. It is reshaping what it means to serve at the highest level and dialling back a tradition that many saw as an unjust entitlement. The repeal of the Presidents’ Entitlements Act may not solve all problems, but it is a symbolic coup — one that could spark broader discussions around public spending, political privilege, and the obligations of leadership.
