P.M.W. Wijayasuriya: Integrity as public duty

By Uditha H. Palihakkara P.M.W. Wijayasuriya served as Sri Lanka's 33rd Auditor General from 11 October 1971 to 2 May 1983, succeeding D.R. Settinayake .His tenure spanned a critical era marked by economic strain, the 1973–74 global oil shocks, constitutional transitions, and major policy shifts. He belonged to a generation of public servants who regarded public office not as a privilege or political entitlement, but as a sacred constitutional trust. His period in office crossed administrations of contrasting economic orientations—from the state-led nationalization policies of Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike to the post-1977 liberalisation era under President J.R. Jayewardene. Yet, throughout these political shifts, the credibility and independence of the Auditor General's Department remained uncompromised. That continuity rested not on political convenience, but on unyielding professional discipline and personal integrity. I knew Mr. Wijayasuriya from my childhood and later had the privilege of benefiting from his guidance and mentorship. He was a graduate science teacher at a leading Sri Lankan school, teaching with a clarity, precision, and intellectual honesty that inspired students who would later distinguish themselves in public and professional life. Even then, he displayed the defining traits of his later career: methodical reasoning, an intolerance for inaccuracy, and an unshakeable commitment to fairness. Determined to advance professionally, he qualified overseas as a Chartered Accountant. Upon returning to Sri Lanka, he made the deliberate choice to enter public service over far more lucrative private sector opportunities. That decision reflected his foundational orientation: high competence dedicated to institutional integrity rather than personal enrichment. Beyond accountancy and public administration, Mr. Wijayasuriya possessed a remarkably broad intellectual curiosity. He maintained a deep engagement with history, philosophy, public policy, science, and Buddhism, viewing professional life as merely one dimension of a broader search for truth and understanding. Those who knew him well often remarked upon his ability to move comfortably across diverse disciplines while retaining the analytical rigour and disciplined reasoning that characterised his audit work. Before his appointment as Auditor General, he served as the first Director of the Corporations Division of the Treasury, established under the Finance Act No. 38 of 1971. At a time when Sri Lanka was rapidly expanding state ownership across key sectors, oversight mechanisms remained fragile. Mr. Wijayasuriya introduced structured financial scrutiny into state enterprises, assembling a team of accountants to lay the institutional foundations that later evolved into the Public Enterprises Department. The enduring significance of his contribution was widely acknowledged across the public sector. Hon. Karu Jayasuriya, former Speaker of Parliament, later referred to him as "the country's most revered and respected Auditor General" when recalling the origins of Sri Lanka's public enterprise oversight framework. Appointed Auditor General in October 1971, Mr. Wijayasuriya assumed leadership during a politically sensitive era. The 1978 Constitution subsequently expanded the audit mandate to cover public corporations, local authorities, and government-vested entities, thereby reinforcing Parliament's constitutional control over public finances. Under his direction, systematic audits brought strict scrutiny to key entities—including the Tea Research Institute of Ceylon, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (notably in the landmark 1979 audit). One of his most consequential battles was ensuring that state corporations came firmly under the audit aegis of the Auditor General. This push met significant resistance from segments of the commercial and professional establishment. Yet his position was uncompromising: wherever public funds are deployed, constitutional accountability must strictly prevail. What appears self-evident today required immense courage and resolve at the time. His independence extended equally to professional governance. As a Council Member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Sri Lanka, he upheld uncompromising standards under pressure. When political influence was brought to bear to secure special admission for a candidate who failed to meet mandatory eligibility requirements, he stood firm behind the Director's decision to refuse. For him, professional standards were non-negotiable. On a personal note, I once suggested to him that calculators be permitted in professional examinations. He expressed deep reservation, arguing that excessive reliance on mechanical aids could weaken core intellectual discipline and numerical intuition. Whether one agrees or not, his underlying philosophy was entirely consistent: tools may assist, but they must never replace human judgment. At a time when entry into the accountancy profession remained restricted to a privileged few, Mr. Wijayasuriya advocated for widening access while rigorously preserving quality. While critics feared a dilution of standards, he believed in democratising opportunity without sacrificing excellence—a vision that history has fully vindicated. The irony is that some senior members of the profession continue to oppose the widening of access to the profession and to criticise Mr. Wijayasuriya and others who initiated that reform. Under his leadership, public sector auditing in Sri Lanka underwent a structural modernization. He emphasized documentary verification, measurable accountability, and the systemic identification of vulnerabilities in public financial management. Crucially, he was among the earliest pioneers advocating for accrual-based accounting in the public sector. When cash-based accounting dominated government reporting, he recognized that true fiscal transparency required accounting for liabilities, long-term assets, commitments, and future obligations. His commitment to evidence-based evaluation extended internationally. In 1983, he authored a major World Bank review examining reporting and evaluation systems for non-financial public enterprises in Papua New Guinea, demonstrating his belief in rigorous, data-driven analytical frameworks over simple narrative reporting. Unfortunately, in Sri Lanka, due to institutional inertia and administrative conservatism, his vision for accrual accounting remained unrealised for decades. Many of the public financial management reforms being debated today simply reflect principles he championed long before they gained widespread acceptance. Mr. Wijayasuriya's integrity came at personal cost. In October 1994, he was appointed as one of three inaugural commissioners to the newly established Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) under Act No. 19 of 1994. When the Commission's findings involving serious corruption by a senior officer of a state bank were ignored by the administration and the official was instead elevated to a higher position, Mr. Wijayasuriya quietly resigned. It was not a dramatic gesture, but a deeply principled one. Accountability without enforcement, he maintained, renders public institutions hollow. His legacy of excellence extended into his personal life as well. His son, Dr. Hans Wijayasuriya—his only child—would later emerge as one of Sri Lanka's most distinguished corporate and digital leaders, making pioneering contributions to telecommunications across the region. Physically modest and unassuming in manner, Mr. Wijayasuriya never sought personal publicity or acclaim. He cultivated standards, not stature. Although Mr. Wijayasuriya passed away some years ago, the standards he embodied have lost none of their relevance Today, as Sri Lanka confronts renewed questions regarding governance, fiscal credibility, and public trust, remembering P.M.W. Wijayasuriya is not an exercise in passive nostalgia, but an imperative for institutional reflection. He viewed public finance as a solemn trust, audit as a vital constitutional safeguard, and integrity as a practice to be lived daily rather than a slogan to be proclaimed. Sri Lanka's institutional credibility will not be restored by legislation alone, but by restoring competence, courage, and integrity to public life. That remains the enduring, silent revolution of his legacy. (The writer, is a former Chairman of the Finance Commission of Sri Lanka, a former Financial Management Specialist at the Commonwealth Secretariat, and has held the presidency of several professional bodies, including CA Sri Lanka and the OPA.) Comments Still No Comments Posted.