The Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney-at-Law

¶ 01 Hon. Speaker, my first supplementary question is this. The Notice Inviting Tenders dated 2025.06.27 clearly states: “Undertaking from the MSI that the Indian shareholding is greater than or equal to 51 per cent.” So it is very clear that only Indian companies can have 51 per cent or more shareholding. We have consistently raised concerns—also linked to MPs’ privileges—that at the very least, the agreements related to this digital initiative should be presented to Parliament.

¶ 02 Hon. Anura Dissanayake and others shouted that day about national sovereignty and the safeguarding of data. This is a biometric data system. Therefore, we need to know—without us having to rely only on what you say—whether you will table the procedural framework of this process. The Attorney-General has said he cannot submit this to the Supreme Court without a reference from the Government. So the case was thrown out. Afterwards, the President came here and even thanked the Supreme Court, saying that for a long time nothing could be done in this country because you all blocked it. I am asking these matters together with what is set out in the tender—particularly the requirement of 51 per cent Indian shareholding. That means no Sri Lankan company can participate. Therefore, I want to know: if 51 per cent goes to India, what remains for us, and what will our controlling position be? Please tell us whether you will table those agreements.

¶ 03 This is a question of the country’s sovereignty, not merely your Government. We do not know what you have signed with India. We must work with India—no issue there—but sending our biometric data to a company with at least 51 per cent Indian ownership clearly raises serious concerns. No Sri Lankan company can bid; 51 per cent goes to an Indian company. Hon. Minister, will you table the agreements? We, as citizens of this country, need to know.