Sri Lanka Rugby (SLR) faces an impending crisis as World Rugby’s January 31 deadline looms, threatening suspension unless governance issues are resolved.
Waruna de Silva
At the heart of the dispute is the controversial Constitutional amendment process that has ignited a power struggle between provincial unions and clubs. Waruna de Silva, a former national player and long-serving administrator of the Western Province Rugby Football Union (WPRFU), fears a ticking bomb is about to explode.
Despite speculation of suspension, De Silva asserts the WPRFU remains active. “The SLR Constitution clearly outlines procedures for suspension, which include recommendations from a disciplinary committee and Council approval. None of these were followed when a dispute over unpaid subscriptions arose,” he explained, referencing a mere Rs. 1,000 in arrears during Harin Fernando’s tenure as Sports Minister.
De Silva stressed that SLR is the sole authority to suspend provincial unions and no formal suspension letter was ever issued. “Even today, the Ministry of Sports sends us meeting invitations, including those for Constitutional discussions. How can we be suspended if we are actively engaged in such communications?” he questioned.
De Silva questioned the secretive manner in which Constitutional amendments were drafted, excluding key stakeholders like provincial unions. “Initially, we were included, but the process lacked transparency. No detailed minutes were shared; instead, decisions were dictated,” he claimed.
The WPRFU has particularly opposed the redistribution of voting rights, which heavily favours clubs over provinces. “Provinces currently hold the majority of votes, ensuring balanced representation. The Amendments skew this, giving clubs disproportionate influence, effectively sidelining provincial unions,” De Silva argued.
He refuted claims that WPRFU opposes reform to retain power. “We support granting clubs voting rights but not at the expense of equity. Transparency and stakeholder consensus are paramount,” he said.
De Silva highlighted the provinces’ indispensable role in grassroots development. “Provinces are the backbone of school rugby and women’s rugby, particularly in rural areas. Clubs, primarily focus on league participation and cannot fulfill this role. Marginalising provinces jeopardises the future of rugby beyond Colombo and Kandy,” warned the former Thomian and CH and FC three-quarter.
He cited examples of provincial programmes nurturing young talent, which could be undermined if provinces lose influence. “Who will champion rugby in underserved regions if provinces are stripped of power?” he asked.
The WPRFU, alongside six other provinces, has taken legal action to challenge the Amendments, arguing procedural violations in convening the Special General Meeting (SGM).
“The SGM should have adhered to the existing Constitution. Instead, the process sidelined provincial voices and violated governance norms,” De Silva charged.
He expressed concern over World Rugby’s role, accusing it of imposing changes without adequate consultation. “World Rugby’s actions, conducted behind closed doors, lack transparency. Forcing Constitutional Amendments without stakeholder consensus undermines the principles of fair governance,” he pointed out.
He demanded the immediate reinstatement of the SLR Council’s executive powers and called for an AGM under the existing Constitution to chart a transparent and inclusive path forward. “SLR must reclaim its autonomy and ensure that changes are made with the consensus of all stakeholders, not dictated externally,” he asserted.
De Silva, who represented Sri Lanka and has over a decade of administrative experience with WPRFU, said reaffirming the Union’s commitment to rugby’s growth was paramount. “Our focus is not on power but on protecting rugby’s future. Provinces and clubs must collaborate to ensure decisions are fair and development continues nationwide,” he said.
