Petition challenging alienation of state properties through Selendiva Investments Limited fixed for Sept. 21

A Fundamental Rights petition filed seeking an order preventing the Treasury Secretary from taking any steps to sell, lease or alienate state properties vested with Selendiva Investments Limited Company was on Thursday (15) fixed for September 21 by the Supreme Court.

Petitioner G. Kapila Renuka Perera, Secretary of the Professional’s National Front Sri Lanka (PNF), filed this petition through Attorney-at-Law Dharshana Weraduwage.

The Supreme Court three-judge bench, headed by Justice Gamini Amarasekara, permitted the petitioner to file an amended petition since the duties and functions of the Cabinet of Ministers have been changed since July 8. 
The petitioner has named Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, Treasury Secretary S.R. Attygalle, Public Enterprises Department Director General P.A.S. Athula Kumara, Selendiva Investments Limited, Auditor General W.P.C. Wickremaratne, the Securities and Exchange Commission of Sri Lanka, Colombo Stock Exchange, Registrar General of Companies, Hotel Developers (Lanka) PLC, Hotels Colombo (1963) Ltd, Bank of Ceylon, Canwill Holdings (Private) Limited, Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation Ltd, the Monetary Board (CBSL), Litro Gas Lanka Ltd, the Urban Development Authority, Secretary to Cabinet, Selendiva Leisure Investments Limited and Attorney General as respondents. 

The petitioner states that on or around May 18, 2021, he has seen a press briefing of Cabinet decisions, which included information relating to several approved proposals, including state-owned Canwill Holdings (Pvt.) Ltd, Hotel Developers (Lanka) PLC and Hotels Colombo Ltd, have been already vested in Selendiva Investments Ltd at present.

The petitioner said Selendiva Investments Ltd has been incorporated in accordance with a Cabinet approval granted on or around March 24, 2020, with 100 percent ownership vested with the Secretary to Treasury to form a state-owned property development company, with the objective of transforming the state-owned hospitality portfolios to optimum performance level through appropriate restructuring.

He said that an investment facilitation model based on public-private partnership has been planned by Selendiva Investments Ltd, with a view to facilitating the identified state-owned institutes and investments. It has been identified to implement three investment portfolios as ‘Heritage Square in Colombo Fort’, ‘Real Estate Development’ and ‘State-Owned Hospitality Sector’, the petitioner added. 

The petitioner states that the proposal made by the Prime Minister to bring Canwill Holdings (Pvt.) Ltd (Grand Hyatt), Hotel Developers (Pvt.) Ltd (Hilton) and Grand Oriental Hotel under a single entity jointly owned by the General Treasury, Bank of Ceylon and Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation, was approved by the Cabinet.

The petitioner further states that the Cabinet decision dated on or around May 17, 2017 is said to have authorised Selendiva Investments Ltd to utilise the services of foreign or domestic consultants or marketing companies to assist and promote its affairs, contrary to the government procurement procedures.

The petitioner states that in the event the respondents attempting to implement the Cabinet decision made on or around May 17, 2021, which includes the incorporation of Selendiva Investments Ltd and Selendiva Leisure Investments Limited, would create a vehement breach of rule of law of the country.  

The petitioner further feared it could create irreparable damages to the cultural heritage of the country since some of the properties contemplated to be vested with Selendiva Investments Ltd are said to be historic and architecturally valuable buildings listed to be preserved, including in the City of Colombo Development Plan 1999.
The petitioner further said it could deprive the petitioner and the citizenry of this country access to salient historical, archaeological, architecturally valuable sites located in the said lands, if this Cabinet decision was implemented.

The petitioner further states that unless the respondents are stayed from implementing the said decision, irreparable damages shall be made to the public properties of the said qualities and irreparable impact on the fundamental rights of the petitioner and on the fundamental rights of all the citizenry of the Republic as well as the said rights of the generations to come.

Meanwhile, the petitioner has sought the Supreme Court’s permission to nominate a Special Bench for the disposal of this petition in terms of Article 132(3) (iii) of the Constitution.