Sri Lanka’s proposed overhaul of cricket governance has reached the Supreme Court, with a former Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) legal official challenging legislation that could leave district associations without voting rights while preserving significant government influence over the sport’s administration.
Attorney-at-Law Dr Chanaka Senanayake, who previously served as Head of Legal at SLC, has petitioned the Supreme Court to examine provisions of the Sri Lanka Cricket Bill concerning voting rights, Board appointments and ministerial intervention.
According to The Morning Telegraph, the petition questions whether the proposed arrangements are consistent with the Constitution and seeks amendments to specific provisions rather than the rejection of the entire legislation.
The challenge comes as Sri Lanka attempts to replace SLC’s interim administration with a new governance structure, amid pressure from the International Cricket Council (ICC) to restore an elected leadership.
Supreme Court petition challenges Sri Lanka Cricket Bill
The Sri Lanka Cricket Bill was published in the Gazette on September 25, 2026, before being presented to Parliament on October 6 by Youth Affairs and Sports Minister Sunil Kumara Gamage.
Senanayake filed his petition on October 8, within the 14-day period available for constitutional challenges to proposed legislation.
The former SLC legal official argues that aspects of the proposed framework could weaken both regional representation and the independence of cricket administration.
His challenge centres on two issues: how voting power would be distributed within SLC and the extent of government involvement in its leadership and operations.
According to The Morning, Senanayake told reporters after filing the petition that he supported elements of the proposed reforms but believed several clauses required amendments before the legislation became law.
District cricket associations could lose voting rights
One of the petition’s central objections concerns Section 32 and the Schedule to the Bill, which establish the proposed voting structure for SLC’s General Body.
The petition states that voting rights would be reserved for Category A and Category B clubs and provincial cricket associations.
Cricket associations representing Sri Lanka’s 25 districts would instead be classified as ordinary members.
Under the arrangement described in the petition, district associations could attend General Body meetings as observers but would not be permitted to speak or vote.
Senanayake argues that this would exclude district-level organisations from formal decision-making, potentially reducing the influence of cricket administrators outside the established club and provincial structures.
The proposed distribution of votes is particularly significant because General Body representation determines which organisations can participate in decisions affecting the governing body’s future leadership.
Western Province clubs could control 69% of SLC votes
The petition also raises concerns about the geographical concentration of voting power under the proposed system.
Of the 26 clubs recognised in Categories A and B, 21 are located in the Western Province districts of Colombo, Gampaha and Kalutara, according to figures cited in the petition.
That represents approximately 81% of clubs in those categories.
The petition further states that Western Province clubs would control 33 of the 40 club votes, equivalent to 82.5%.
When nine provincial votes are included, the petition calculates that approximately 69% of the overall voting strength would remain concentrated in the Western Province.
Senanayake contends that such a structure could disadvantage cricket organisations elsewhere in the country and undermine the objective of creating a more representative national governing body.
These figures form part of the petitioner’s challenge and have not been established as findings by the Supreme Court.
President’s proposed role and SLC director appointments questioned
Beyond voting rights, the petition challenges provisions that would give government-linked officials roles in Sri Lanka Cricket’s governance.
Section 28 of the proposed Bill would designate the President of Sri Lanka as Patron of SLC.
The legislation also provides for a nomination committee responsible for selecting seven Independent Directors, with the Secretary to the Ministry of Sports and the Chairman of the National Sports Council serving as ex officio members, according to the petition.
Senanayake argues that these arrangements could compromise SLC’s institutional independence by giving the Executive and Sports Ministry influence over the governing body’s leadership.
He has also objected to the Sports Minister’s proposed authority to replace an existing administration with a temporary three-member committee.
The petition questions whether those powers are compatible with the degree of autonomy expected of a national cricket governing body.
Section 44(5) preserves Sports Minister’s intervention powers
Although the Bill would transfer responsibility for managing SLC’s affairs to its Board of Directors, it would not remove the Sports Minister’s ability to intervene in the organisation.
The proposed legislation would also shift responsibility for appointing national selection committees from the Minister to the Board, reducing direct political involvement in an important cricketing function.
However, as previously reported by Sri Lanka’s Sunday Times, Section 44 establishes procedures through which the Minister could obtain information and initiate investigations or audits concerning SLC.
Section 44(5) provides for action following specified reports, including findings from a retired judge appointed under the legislation or the Auditor General.
The subsection states: “Upon receipt of the report of the retired Judge appointed under subsection (4), or the report of the Auditor General under paragraph (a) of subsection (2), the Minister may take such action pursuant to or in accordance with the recommendations, findings or determinations contained therein, in relation to the removal, suspension or banning of the functions of the Independent Director or Elected Director of the Board concerned, or the Board, and thereafter take the necessary steps for the election or appointment of a new Independent Director or Elected Director of the Board or a new Board, as the case may be, in accordance with this Act”
The provision could allow the removal or suspension of individual directors, restrictions on their functions, or action affecting the entire Board, followed by the election or appointment of replacements.
Importantly, the Minister’s authority is conditional on the prescribed reporting and investigative processes. Section 44(5) does not, by itself, establish an unrestricted power to dismiss SLC’s leadership.
The constitutional challenge raises a separate question about whether the extent of those powers is compatible with the independence envisaged under the proposed governance framework.
ICC independence requirements add to governance concerns
Senanayake’s petition also questions whether the proposed legislation would meet its own stated objective of protecting Sri Lanka Cricket’s independence within the ICC and the Asian Cricket Council (ACC).
Both organisations operate within international cricket’s governance framework, where inappropriate government interference in member boards is a significant concern.
Sri Lanka Cricket is currently operating under a Cricket Transformation Committee established following the resignation of former SLC President Shammi Silva and the previous Executive Committee in late April 2026.
The nine-member committee, headed by former parliamentarian and investment banker Eran Wickramaratne, was appointed to oversee the organisation and pursue structural reforms.
The ICC has called for the restoration of elected governance at SLC, placing additional importance on the legislation’s proposed transition arrangements.
The Bill envisages elections being called by the Transformation Committee after the legislation is passed, with a six-month period allowed for the process.
What happens next for the Sri Lanka Cricket Bill?
Senanayake has asked the Supreme Court to determine whether the disputed provisions are inconsistent with the Constitution and identify amendments needed to address those concerns.
His petition does not seek to invalidate the Sri Lanka Cricket Bill in its entirety.
The legislation remains subject to the required constitutional and parliamentary processes before it can become law.
The Supreme Court’s determination could influence the final wording of provisions governing voting rights, director appointments and ministerial intervention.
For Sri Lanka Cricket, the outcome will help shape how authority is distributed between regional cricket organisations, the elected Board and the government under the proposed governance structure.
