(The Sunday Times) – A recent audit examination into financial statement and other legal and regulatory requirements of Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) for the year 2025 has raised serious concerns over transparency, competitiveness and possible conflicts of interest in several major projects, including the installation of a new floodlight system at the R. Premadasa International Cricket Stadium, construction work at the Anuradhapura District Cricket Association sports complex, and payments made for legal consultancy services.

Rs. 1.981 billion, excluding taxes, in August 2024 for the replacement of the existing floodlight system at the R. Premadasa Stadium as a significant issue. The estimated cost of the project, according to the report had been Rs.1.705 billion, meaning the awarded value was Rs. 276 million higher than the initial estimate.

The audit also noted that only one bidder had submitted proposals for the project, raising concerns over whether SLC had achieved sufficient competition and obtained the best possible financial outcome.

According to procurement regulations, projects of this nature should have been handled through a Cabinet Appointed Procurement Committee (CAPC), together with a Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC), as required under the Government Procurement Guidelines.

However, instead of following this procedure, SLC had appointed its own Procurement Committee through a decision of the Executive Committee. The audit pointed out that the chairman of this committee was a Vice President of the SLC Executive Committee, while the other four members were also representatives of the same Executive Committee.

The audit observed that such an arrangement compromised the independence of the procurement process and prevented satisfactory assurance of transparency and accountability.

Further concerns were raised over the method of procurement adopted for the floodlight project. The Government Procurement Guidelines state that International Competitive Bidding (ICB) should be considered when local market capacity is limited and international competition could provide greater benefits.

Despite the scale and technical nature of the project, SLC proceeded with National Competitive Bidding (NCB) without carrying out a proper assessment to determine the most suitable procurement method. The audit noted that this decision may have resulted in SLC losing an opportunity to attract wider competition, achieve better pricing and obtain potential financial benefits through international bidding.

The selection of consultants for the project also came under scrutiny. The audit found that a private consultancy firm had been engaged without following the required procurement procedures outlined in the Government Procurement Guidelines relating to the Selection and Employment of Consultants – 2007.

The Audit has also raised concern over a possible conflict of interest involving the contractor. The Chairman of the contracted company was also serving as the Chairman of the Sinhalese Sports Club, an affiliated member of SLC with voting rights. The audit stated that the possibility of a conflict of interest and governance concerns could not be ruled out.

The audit further highlighted issues relating to construction work carried out at the Anuradhapura District Cricket Association sports complex, where SLC had spent Rs.50.83 million. In this project, the Chairman of the Technical Evaluation Committee had also acted as the Project Consultant, while two other members of the Evaluation Committee were working under him. The audit pointed out that this arrangement affected the independence of the evaluation process and raised concerns regarding procurement ethics and conflict of interest.

Meanwhile, SLC had paid Rs.12.46 million to four legal professionals on January 31, 2025 for professional services related to amendments to the SLC constitution and an analysis of the National Sports Association Regulations No. of 2025.

However, auditors were unable to verify the basis on which these professionals were selected or whether there was a prior agreement governing the payments. The relevant documents required to justify the selection process and allowances were not made available for audit examination.

The Audit also questioned the uncompleted project worth Rs.165 million to prepare a corporate plan in July 2025. Even though the contractor was given a six-month time frame to produce it, it has not been produced at the time of the audit.

The Audit also question the payment of Rs.8.023 million as honourariums and travel allowances for six members of the Election Committee despite guidelines issued by the Director General of Sports says only a sum of Rs.150, 000 including travel allowances shall be paid for a maximum number of five people.

Also concerns have been raised over the non-deduction of Personal Income Tax (APIT) from January 2023 from cricket players, local consultants and coordinators for the payments made to them amounting Rs.860.43 million in 2023 and Rs.2,355.93 million in 2024.