Transparency Televised: How Live COPE/COPA Broadcasts Are Reshaping Sri Lanka’s Political Landscape

Introduction

Sri Lanka’s Committee on Public Accounts (COPA) and Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) have long been the Parliament’s watchdogs over government spending and state institutions. Until recently, their proceedings were tucked away from public view, with findings only emerging in dense reports or brief news snippets. All that changed when Parliament flipped on the cameras – literally. In 2019, for the first time in Sri Lankan history, live media were permitted to cover a COPE session. COPA soon followed suit, opening its doors to the press by 2020 as a matter of principle This bold move to broadcast committee hearings live – via television and online streams – has had a profound impact on the political landscape, transforming how citizens engage with governance and how officials behave under the spotlight.

A New Era of Transparency

Bringing COPA and COPE sessions into the public eye has ushered in a new era of transparency in Sri Lanka. Instead of second-hand summaries, any interested citizen can now watch oversight proceedings in real time, whether on a dedicated TV channel or the Parliament’s official webcasts. The committees themselves recognized the value of this openness; as one COPA chairman noted, allowing media into hearings “would facilitate its work more efficiently”. Indeed, sunlight has proven to be a powerful disinfectant. The once-obscure hearings have become “vital and popular subjects of public concern and attention”, because they routinely expose “massive mismanagement, utter misuse, and rampant corrupt practices” that have led to a “colossal waste of public funds”.

This televised transparency is gradually rebuilding trust (or at least interest) in governance. Many Sri Lankans, jaded by years of opaque dealings, are tuning in to see accountability in action. Watching officials squirm under tough questioning or struggle to justify dubious expenditures can be grimly satisfying – and educational. Observers note that such openness can have a “positive effect on the public’s perception of Parliament” by illuminating the workings of democracy and the efforts to rein in abuse. At the very least, live broadcasts have made Parliament more accessible, demystifying the process of fiscal oversight. Terms like “COPE report” or “COPA recommendations” have entered everyday conversation, tweeted and debated by a public no longer in the dark.

Public Engagement and Political Accountability

The live broadcasts have significantly sharpened political accountability. When a scandal or irregularity is aired in a COPE/COPA hearing, it is immediately in the court of public opinion – creating pressure for swift action. The media and social networks amplify clips of explosive revelations, often by the same evening news. Crucially, politicians and bureaucrats now know they are being watched by millions, not just a handful of committee members. This public scrutiny has led to real consequences and a few dramatic moments that have gripped the country:

• The “Adani Exposé” (June 2022): In a televised COPE hearing, the Chairman of the Ceylon Electricity Board shocked the nation by claiming President Gotabaya Rajapaksa told him that India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi had pressured Sri Lanka to award a wind power project to the Adani Groupi This bombshell allegation – effectively accusing a foreign leader of influence-peddling – was caught on camera and spread like wildfire. Within a day, facing a diplomatic storm, the official withdrew his statement as “emotional” and the President issued a vehement denial. Yet, the damage was done: the public had seen, live, a glimpse of the behind-the-scenes political pressure in high-level deals. The uproar forced an unusual degree of accountability, with inquiries and discussions that would never have occurred if not for the broadcast.

• The Defiant Secretary Incident (2025): In another unprecedented scene, a top bureaucrat – Thilaka Jayasundara, Secretary to the Ministry of Industries – stormed into a COPE meeting and angrily rebuked the committee’s line of questioning. As astonished viewers watched this senior public servant openly challenge Parliament’s authority, a “political firestorm” erupted. Her conduct, described by one MP as “defiant to the point of insubordination”, reignited debate about an entrenched, corrupt bureaucratic class shielding political cronies. Had this confrontation happened behind closed doors, it might have been swept under the rug. Instead, broadcast coverage turned it into a national talking point, galvanizing calls for reforms in the civil service and reminding officials that oversight is no longer optional.

• Health Ministry Scandal and Aftermath (2022): Live COPA investigations have even led to legal action against high-level officials. A notable example was a COPA probe into irregular medical supply procurements in 2022, which uncovered blatant misuse of funds in the Ministry of Health. The inquiry’s revelations were so egregious that they culminated in the arrest (and remanding) of then Health Minister Keheliya Rambukwella on corruption charges. This was a powerful message: not only were corrupt acts exposed on camera, but they also carried consequences. The sight of a sitting cabinet minister being held accountable partly due to evidence aired in a COPA hearing sent shockwaves through the political class. It signaled that televised oversight isn’t just theatre – it can spark real enforcement.

Each of these incidents has reinforced a new reality: Sri Lanka’s oversight committees now operate in a fishbowl, under intense public gaze. The immediate public awareness of findings means that ministers can no longer shrug off COPA/COPE reports quietly. The court of public opinion is ever alert, ready to demand resignations, prosecutions, or at least answers. In an era when citizens are emboldened – as seen during the 2022 “Aragalaya” protests against corruption and misrule – live broadcasts serve as a conduit for people’s anger and expectations. They ensure that explosive facts uncovered at 10 AM in a committee room become common knowledge by the 8 PM news, fueling public discourse and often forcing the government’s hand.

Changing the Political Culture

Beyond individual scandals, the live broadcasting of COPA and COPE is gradually changing Sri Lanka’s political culture. There is a new expectation of transparency: if a major issue of public finance is being discussed, people feel they have the right to witness it. Politicians, sensing this shift, have latched onto the committees as platforms to showcase their commitment to accountability. Committee chairs from both government and opposition now know their reputations are boosted by tough, headline-grabbing interrogations – and conversely, that any failure to act decisively may be judged harshly by viewers. In this way, the broadcasts have introduced a welcome incentive for political actors to perform their oversight roles diligently in front of the cameras.

Moreover, routine bureaucratic stonewalling or political evasiveness that might have been tolerated in private meetings are now likely to be called out. The public nature of the hearings puts reputations on the line. For instance, when officials fumble to explain missing funds or questionable decisions, their discomfort is palpably witnessed by the electorate, adding pressure to rectify issues. This dynamic is empowering honest public servants and MPs to push harder, knowing the people back them. It is also deterring (to some extent) blatant lying – after all, it’s much harder to lie when a video clip of your testimony can be replayed endlessly as evidence of dishonesty.

Perhaps the most profound change is how the public is reclaiming a sense of ownership over government operations. Citizens who once felt disconnected from the murky processes of governance now have a front-row seat. Community groups, activists, and journalists are using information from COPA/COPE broadcasts to bolster Right to Information (RTI) requests and investigative reports. Civil society is energized by the steady stream of data points coming out of these hearings – from inefficiencies in a state-owned enterprise to irregularities in ministry accounts – and is leveraging them to demand reforms. In short, transparency is breeding a more informed and assertive citizenry.

That said, this cultural shift is not without its challenges. The flood of revelations can also breed cynicism if not accompanied by real reforms. Some critics caution that without follow-through, live broadcasts might become a “media show or question-and-answer session” that exposes wrongdoing but results in little concrete change It’s a valid concern: simply televising incompetence or corruption is not a panacea unless authorities take corrective action. The government must ensure that COPA and COPE findings are acted upon – be it by strengthening institutions, recovering misused funds, or prosecuting offenders – otherwise the public’s newly raised expectations could sour into disillusionment. In essence, transparency has set the stage; now accountability must play out to the finale.

Conclusion

In my opinion, the live broadcasting of COPA and COPE hearings has been a game-changer for Sri Lankan democracy. It has cracked open the doors of Parliament’s backrooms and let the people in, figuratively and literally. Thanks to the innovative technical solution enabling these live telecasts, oversight is no longer confined to committee room walls – it is everyone’s business. The impact on the political landscape is unmistakable: a more informed public, emboldened oversight bodies, and officials who know that their misdeeds (or triumphs) will be on full display. Sri Lankans have gotten a taste of real-time accountability, and they are unlikely to relinquish it.

Sure, the journey is far from over. Transparency must translate into tangible reform, and Sri Lanka’s institutions still have to prove that all the public exposés lead to cleaner governance. But the direction is right. A culture of secrecy is giving way to a culture of scrutiny. From here on, any government – present or future – will find it politically difficult to roll back this openness without facing public wrath. The genie of transparency is out of the bottle, and it is illuminating every corner of public finance it can reach.

Ultimately, live COPA and COPE broadcasts are more than just a media innovation; they are a democratic leap forward. They strengthen the social contract by showing citizens that “yes, we are watching out for you – and you can watch us do it.” In a country that has weathered scandals and crises, this kind of openness is a breath of fresh air. It shines a light on both malfeasance and positive efforts at reform. And as any Sri Lankan now knows, when the lights are on and the cameras rolling, those in power are far more likely to behave – or face the consequences. That can only be healthy for Sri Lanka’s future, as an engaged public and transparent governance go hand in hand towards a more accountable, trust-worthy political landscape.