Eight years after its establishment, Sri Lanka’s Office on Missing Persons (OMP) has faced significant challenges in tracing individuals who have gone missing. Created in 2016 and launched in 2018 to investigate cases stemming from decades of armed conflict and political unrest, the institution is now under increasing criticism from families, international observers, and even its former commissioners.

The statistics reveal a troubling situation. Of the 16,966 complaints received since its inception, over 10,500 remain under investigation. In 2024, the government announced plans to resolve all pending cases by 2027, proposing the formation of 25 sub-committees comprising 75 members, including retired judges and lawyers. However, whether this timeline will be realistic is still uncertain.

The OMP’s most tangible tool has been the Certificate of Absence, a legal document intended to help families manage the property and bank accounts of missing persons without declaring them deceased. Unfortunately, this certificate has become a symbol of institutional dysfunction. Banks and financial institutions frequently refuse to acknowledge it, even when proper account nominees are present. Chairman Mahesh Katulanda has engaged in discussions with the Central Bank, Registrar General’s Department, and Attorney General’s Department in hopes of securing legal amendments to enforce recognition. He refers to the certificate as a lifeline, yet for many families, it remains nothing more than worthless paper.

This situation underscores a broader issue: although the Certificate of Absence was supported by the law creating the OMP, there is no specific statute requiring other institutions to comply. While some are familiar with the certificate and accept it, others do not, leaving families to navigate this inconsistency while coping with the loss of their loved ones.

Public Rejection and Internal Dissent

The credibility gap extends beyond bureaucratic hurdles. In 2022, the UN High Commissioner remarked that the OMP had failed to clarify the fates of disappeared persons in any meaningful way. In 2018, mothers of the disappeared in Jaffna and Kilinochchi refused to participate in the OMP’s activities, publicly expressing their objections in an open letter. They cited a lack of transparency in the appointment of commissioners, made by a council that included politicians with vested interests in protecting the military. The inclusion of a former senior military officer as a commissioner was particularly unacceptable to the mothers.

In 2022, Commissioner Shiraz Noordeen resigned, stating that the OMP could not operate independently to deliver justice. In October 2024, when OMP officials, including Chairman Thambiaiah Yogarajah, visited Mannar, families presented them with a dossier of over 300 disappearance cases, complete with details and photographs. Despite this evidence, the OMP had not conducted a meaningful investigation into a single case, according to the families.

When the government and OMP offered death certificates or small compensation payments in 2024, families in Mullaitivu publicly rejected these proposals. They questioned why the OMP was hastily issuing death certificates instead of pursuing investigations. They demanded to know who was responsible for the murders, stating that if death certificates were the solution, there should be accountability for the perpetrators. Families insisted on an international investigation, marching in the heat while holding photographs of their missing relatives.

The Path Forward

The OMP’s 2023-2025 annual report categorises its 14,988 cases into three phases, prioritising the most recent disappearances from 2000 to 2021. By the end of 2022, panels of inquiry had examined 2,389 complaints. The report highlights several challenges: insufficient staff and funding, protests by victim families, international pressure, recruitment restrictions, and the ongoing economic crisis.

The government’s 2027 deadline either represents a genuine commitment or yet another empty promise. For families who have spent years, sometimes decades, searching for answers, the distinction is less important than the results. They have gathered their own evidence, organised protests, and rejected superficial solutions. What they seek remains consistent: an honest accounting of what happened to their relatives and accountability for those responsible.