Airbus accused airline chief dies in Colombo

Former SriLankan Airlines chief executive Kapila Chandrasena was found dead in Colombo on Friday, hours after a court ordered his re-arrest in the long-running Airbus bribery case that has drawn fresh attention to high-level corruption allegations involving the island’s political and aviation establishment.

Police said Chandrasena’s body was discovered in Kollupitiya, an affluent district of Colombo, and that investigators were examining the circumstances of his death. Early police accounts indicated suspected suicide, though the formal inquiry and post-mortem process were still under way. The case has unsettled Colombo’s political and legal circles because of its timing, coming shortly after bail proceedings and renewed court action over alleged breaches of bail conditions.

Chandrasena had been on bail after being remanded in March over allegations tied to the purchase of Airbus aircraft for the state carrier. Prosecutors accused him of conspiring to accept a bribe linked to a multi-billion-dollar aircraft procurement programme under which SriLankan Airlines agreed to buy 10 Airbus aircraft. Investigators alleged that the bribery arrangement involved a promised payment of about $16 million and that €1.45 million was routed through a Singapore bank account connected to a company set up in Brunei in the name of his wife.

The Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court ordered his re-arrest after the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption raised concerns over the sureties presented for his bail. The commission told court that the sureties were allegedly not genuine guarantors in the ordinary sense and that the arrangement had undermined the trust placed in the bail process. The order placed Chandrasena back at the centre of a case that has moved through several legal phases since the Airbus scandal became public in 2020.

The Airbus allegations first triggered major scrutiny after court-approved settlements in Europe exposed improper payments linked to aircraft sales across several jurisdictions. Sri Lanka’s case centred on aircraft ordered during the period when SriLankan Airlines was expanding its fleet under state ownership. Chandrasena, who served as chief executive until 2015, became one of the most prominent figures named in the domestic investigation, along with his wife, Priyanka Niyomali Wijenayake.

The case gained sharper political sensitivity after investigators told court that Chandrasena had allegedly made statements linking part of the proceeds to former president Mahinda Rajapaksa and former aviation minister Piyankara Jayaratne. The alleged payments included Rs 60 million to Rajapaksa and Rs 20 million to Jayaratne. Both figures have faced political controversy over governance and public procurement during earlier administrations. Rajapaksa and his family have consistently rejected corruption allegations against them, describing such claims as politically driven.

Chandrasena’s lawyers had challenged aspects of the case, including the circumstances under which statements attributed to him were recorded. Defence arguments before court included claims that parts of his account had been obtained under pressure. That dispute raised questions over how investigators would use his statements in any future proceedings, particularly where allegations touched senior political figures.

SriLankan Airlines has for years been a symbol of the financial strain caused by state-owned enterprises. The carrier has accumulated heavy losses, required repeated government support and become a recurring issue in discussions with creditors and international lenders. The Airbus procurement controversy deepened public frustration because it combined losses at a national airline with allegations of inflated aircraft purchases, offshore corporate structures and political kickbacks.

The scandal also carried consequences beyond Sri Lanka. Chandrasena and members of his immediate family were designated by the United States in 2024 over alleged corruption linked to the Airbus deal, adding diplomatic weight to a case already closely watched by anti-corruption campaigners. The sanctions reflected broader pressure on Colombo to pursue asset recovery and strengthen procurement safeguards after years of public anger over graft, debt accumulation and weak accountability.