Hon. Chithral Fernando, Attorney at Law, M.P.

Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB)· Puttalam

Profession: ---

Roster profile ↗

Speeches 50 #95 of 225·#30 in party

Attendance 3/8 days present (of recorded)

Speech history

50 speeches

23 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando seconded a Motion concerning the Special Entrance Exam required for private university LLB graduates to enter Law College. He questioned the results, noting that all candidates failed last year and that this year some candidates reported unusually low marks in one paper despite higher marks in the other two, while no re-scrutiny appears to be available. He urged consideration of the unfilled vacancies, stating that only about 140 of 217 candidates reached the cut-off despite 201 places being available, to prevent affected students losing another year. Adjournment Motion: Law College Special Entrance Examination Justice & Human RightsEducation Read →
19 August 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando supported regulating casinos and gambling to attract foreign exchange, tourism and investment, citing the City of Dreams Sri Lanka project and Melco Resorts’ concerns about legal and regulatory uncertainty. He argued that the Gambling Regulatory Authority Bill gives extensive control to the Minister, including over appointments, removals, capital requirements, funding, staffing, directives and regulations, undermining the stated independence of the regulator. He urged a stable and credible framework to reassure investors and warned that political inconsistency and excessive ministerial control could deter investment. Debate: Gambling Regulatory Authority Bill, Public Debt Management Act Regulations, and Foreign Exchange Act Regulations Foreign AffairsPublic FinanceCorruption & Governance Reform Read →
5 August 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando presented a petition to Parliament on behalf of Mr. Augustin Fernando of Kanjukkuliya, Mugunuwatawana. No details of the petition’s subject matter were provided in the statement. Petitions Parliamentary Procedure Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando urged modernization of stamp duty payment and document registration processes, citing practical difficulties for lawyers in obtaining bank slips and referring to India’s digital stamp duty system with online payment, automatic calculation and QR-code printing. He tabled a document on the Indian model and argued that procedural modernization is preferable to merely increasing fees. He also responded to Deputy Minister Sunil Watagala’s challenge on local authority voting procedures, stating that the relevant Local Authorities Guidelines Compendium refers to an “open vote” and that any dispute over its interpretation should ultimately be resolved by court. Debate: Stamp Duty (Special Provisions) Act Order and Imports and Exports (Control) Act Regulations Parliamentary ProcedureLaw & Order Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando addressed the Order under the Stamp Duty (Special Provisions) Act, arguing that doubling stamp duty on lease agreements is primarily a revenue measure and should be presented as such. He warned that higher duties could encourage informal, unstamped lease agreements, increasing disputes and adding to court backlogs. He urged the Government, if it intends to “update” the law, to introduce digital or e-stamping systems similar to those in India and Indonesia to simplify compliance and reduce evasion. Debate: Stamp Duty (Special Provisions) Act Order and Imports and Exports (Control) Act Regulations Public FinanceJustice & Human Rights Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Chithral Fernando thanked the Minister for taking prompt action concerning an industry on which over a million people depend. He conveyed appreciation on behalf of those affected by or reliant on the sector. Oral Question: Police Officers, Vehicles and Resources Availability (Q.Unspecified/2024) Parliamentary Procedure Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando raised concerns that recent increases in charges for Police services at concerts and events have significantly raised costs for the entertainment industry, which he said supports about one million people directly and indirectly. He noted that Police revenue from such services exceeded Rs. 100 million in the first five months of the year compared with Rs. 47 million the previous year, while organizers also pay entertainment taxes and venue fees. He asked whether the Government would consider relief or adjustments to avoid burdening the industry. Oral Question: Police Officers, Vehicles and Resources Availability (Q.Unspecified/2024) Cost of LivingLaw & Order Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Chithral Fernando sought clarification on the amount referred to for the previous year, asking whether it was approximately Rs. 47 million. Oral Question: Police Officers, Vehicles and Resources Availability (Q.Unspecified/2024) Public Finance Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Chithral Fernando sought clarification through a second supplementary question, referring to an amount of around Rs. 130 million mentioned by the Minister. The intervention appears to request further detail on that figure in the context of the Minister’s prior response. Oral Question: Police Officers, Vehicles and Resources Availability (Q.Unspecified/2024) Parliamentary Procedure Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Asked the responsible Minister to state the current progress on the matter under discussion as his first supplementary question. Oral Question: Police Officers, Vehicles and Resources Availability (Q.Unspecified/2024) Parliamentary Procedure Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando raised concerns about Police resources being provided for a private event at the BMICH, allegedly based on false claims about expected attendance by schoolchildren and parents. He noted reports that 119 Police vehicles and four motorcycles were supplied for a fee, and referred to public acknowledgements by the Cabinet Spokesman and Police Media Spokesman that an inquiry was underway. He asked why Police resources were deployed for the event, whether proper procedures were followed, and the current status of the inquiry. Oral Question: Police Officers, Vehicles and Resources Availability (Q.Unspecified/2024) Corruption & Governance ReformLaw & Order Read →
20 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando asked the Minister of Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs whether Sri Lanka Police personnel, vehicles and other resources may be provided on a paid basis for private or commercial activities, and requested the relevant legal authority, procedures, limits and fee methodology. He also sought the revenue earned from such services in 2024 and in 2025 to date, separately. The question further asked what criteria are applied to requesting parties and whether security analysis reports are obtained to assess threat levels. Oral Question: Police Officers, Vehicles and Resources Availability (Q.Unspecified/2024) Public FinanceLaw & Order Read →
3 June 2025 AI summary The Hon. Chithral Fernando clarified that he had not mentioned any name in his preceding remarks. The intervention appears to address or correct an attribution made during the debate. Debate: Personal Data Protection (Amendment) Bill - Second Reading Parliamentary Procedure Read →
3 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando clarified that he had not named or referred to any individual in his remarks. The statement appears to respond to a procedural concern or interruption during the debate. Debate: Personal Data Protection (Amendment) Bill - Second Reading Parliamentary Procedure Read →
3 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando criticized the Government for not addressing staff shortages in key justice-sector institutions, including the Government Analyst’s Department, Attorney General’s Department and Prisons Department. He argued that the Government had itself acted without adequate data in relation to issues such as rice and salt imports, and rejected its criticism of misinformation by alleging that it had previously misled the public. On the Personal Data Protection (Amendment) Bill, he said the Opposition would support necessary future amendments for a digital economy, but demanded clearer disclosure to Parliament on the digital ID project, related arrangements with India, and what personal data would be shared, processed, retained or subject to the right to be forgotten. Debate: Personal Data Protection (Amendment) Bill - Second Reading Public FinanceJustice & Human Rights Read →
3 June 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando questioned the rationale for amendments to the Personal Data Protection Act, particularly the proposed change to Section 20 removing mandatory Data Protection Officers for public authorities and related definitional changes. He asked the Government to explain how the amendments would support economic development, digital integration, and data processing, and whether making DPOs optional is consistent with the GDPR model on which the 2022 Act was based. He also sought clarification on changes to commencement timelines, saying their necessity and benefits had not been adequately explained. Debate: Personal Data Protection (Amendment) Bill - Second Reading Parliamentary ProcedurePublic Finance Read →
22 May 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando presented a petition from Mr. P.W.R. Fernando of Police Headquarters, Negombo. Presentation of Petitions Parliamentary Procedure Read →
8 May 2025 AI summary Hon. Chithral Fernando clarified that he had asked only one supplementary question. Oral Question: Prevention of Delay in Ending Civil Court Cases (Q.133/2024) Parliamentary Procedure Read →
8 May 2025 AI summary The Hon. Chithral Fernando indicated that he was raising a second supplementary question. No substantive question or policy issue is included in the provided excerpt. Oral Question: Prevention of Delay in Ending Civil Court Cases (Q.133/2024) Parliamentary Procedure Read →
8 May 2025 AI summary Chithral Fernando referred to the Minister’s undertaking on the Court Automation Programme and digitalization, noting that its implementation had been delayed. He asked what steps are being taken to address delays and the judiciary’s approach to technology, citing incidents involving mobile phones and the use of tablets or laptops by lawyers in court. Oral Question: Prevention of Delay in Ending Civil Court Cases (Q.133/2024) InfrastructureJustice & Human Rights Read →