KAMALIKA PIERIS

Money was  an important factor in the VFS Global visa service launched  at Katunayake in April 2024. Firstly,  there was the money that the Consortium was supposed to bring into the project.

The Parliamentary Committee on Public Finance (COPF) said in its report on the visa matter, thatCabinet Memorandum dated September 8, 2023, presented by Ministry of Public security, said that  IVS-GBS Global Services proposed to invest USD 200 million to provide the necessary technical equipment, software, and knowledge  needed for the new visa service they were offering.

However, upon reviewing the Consortium Outsourcing Agreement and proposal, the  investment amount of USD 200 million is not mentioned.  Nowhere in the final Outsourcing Agreement signed between Controller General of  Immigration and IVS-GBS-VHS is this $200 million mentioned.  Can this be real, where did this investment go, asked COPF Chairman Harsha de Silva.  

COPF  drew  attention to this  USD 200 million in  its concluding remarks, as well,  saying  the reported allocation of USD 200 million remains uninvested and unexplained.  COPF had   summoned the  Immigration Department  and the Ministry of Public Security  for questioning  but  officials from both agencies did not turn up at the inquiry.

There was a second money issue, the fees that went to VFS Global. VFS  charged an additional USD 25.77  from each visa applicant for the 180 day visa .This  was composed of a service  charge of US$ 18.5 and convenience fee” of   US$ 7.27 .

 In May 2024, government   re-introduced the 3O day visa.   VFS got a cut from this as well. A fee of $10 out of the USD 50 went to VFS. Frontline Socialist Party  informed the  public  of this  through television news . Before VFS came in, the entire sum of USD 50 had gone  to the government

All  three   fees went  straight to VSF. It was sent to  an offshore account  in  Dubai. Critics observed that these fees  would earn  VFS a huge sum annually. One source gave the  annual takings as  US$ 50 million  and another  said  $1.4 billion. a third source said, if  the 2024 target of 2.3 million tourists  is achieved the Consortium stands to gain SLR 12.76 billion over a 12 month period.

Further, there will be a daily balance of  around US$ 250,000  available to VFS  in Dubai. Apart from the  daily interest that  VFS would get from this sum ,   VFS can also use this money for other  purposes such as  overnight lending.

Critics  also looked  at how the visa revenue came to the Sri Lanka  government .  Earlier, when  the visas were processed locally, the daily take was sent to the Treasury at the end of each day. Once VFS took over, the daily revenue  was  sent to the  Dubai account of the company and transferred to Sri Lanka two days later,  minus  the  service charges.

Critics  took the position  that this was government money. If  you don’t pay  the VSF charges, you can’t get a visa. Therefore, it is a levy charged by the government. This  is money belonging to the government of Sri Lanka . it should properly come into the Consolidated Fund, said critics.

All you need   to apply for a Sri Lanka tourist  visa, is a valid passport. No other documents are checked. They don’t need to courier things up and down. So why these towering processing fees ,asked  critics. The VFS is doing a similar service in Brazil for less than $4 per visa.

Parliament  Committee on Public Finance  COPF examined the two fees, labelled service” and convenience” . The government   Agreement  with the Consortium  said that  the  fee of USD 18.50 is exclusive of any payment gateway fees, local taxes, and other transaction fees. It was  a direct levy to VFS.  It was arbitrary and could be increased by VFS .

COPF  further  observed that the fee of USD 18.50 was not negotiated or evaluated by the Evaluation Committee, the Cabinet,  Immigration Department  or the Ministry of Public Security. 

Neither the Cabinet nor the Evaluation Committee had paid the slightest attention to the biggest financial implication, namely, the exorbitant fee of $18.50 being charged by IVS-GBS-VFS. In fact, there is no mention in any document that the USD 18.50 service charge was ever justified or even queried.

Evaluation Committee made no comment on, or comparison of Mobitel’s $1 offer against VFS’s $18.50 price. It acted purely as a rubber stamp, said COPF.

COPF asked  Attorney General to clarify whether the fee of USD 18.50 was a levy that would have to be authorized by Parliament under Article 148 of the Constitution. That is, whether like visa fees, this fee requires approval by Parliament. The AG responded that no such parliamentary approval was needed.

 Attorney General said  The fee charged by  the Consortium, is a service fee” charged from applicants for on-line visas for the service provided to them by the Service Provider and does not form part of the Visa Fees that are approved by Parliament. In the circumstances, Parliamentary approval for them does not arise.

COPF  also discovered that a convenience fee of USD 7.27 was charged in addition to the service fee. COPF inquired into the convenience fee. Attorney General’s letter to COPF  dated May 13, 2024   said  that the Agreement  did  not explicitly mention or define  ‘convenience fees.’ The exact criteria and components of the convenience fee were not stated in the Agreement.  

Ministry of Public Security  told COPF  the convenience fee  was a tax  COPF pointed out that a tax cannot be labelled as a convenience fee.  it should be accurately referred to as a tax and credited to the Treasury account.

These two charges were  not shown to the government and they were not approved by the government .   Government did not even know of them. Minister  Alles said  that only the proposal to increase visa fees was presented to Parliament.  There was no mention of charges for VFS Global.

Agreements signed by government agencies are usually vetted by the Attorney General,  On 15.11.2023, the AG’s observations said It is assumed that the financial and technical implications of the agreement have been carefully considered and that all necessary approvals have been or will be obtained prior to its execution.”

 Media observed  that neither the gazette nor the Immigration Department’s notice containing visa categories and their corresponding fees mentioned any agreement with private companies or publicized their service charges.

The VFS visa service   had another weakness.  It  was considered a security risk.      MPs Ranawake, Sumanthiran and  Hakeem emphasized this issue when they petitioned Supreme Court.  The petitioners  pointed out  that  in entrusting the e-visa service to foreign companies,  the government  faced  a risk of security information being disclosed to an outside party. This  may pose a threat to national security.  Outsiders  will have access to vast amounts of data that could be used for the benefit of a foreign nation. 

Just then,  there occurred  a definite, undeniable  data breach. One visitor who was given a visa, suddenly found his email flooded with personal details of other applicants sent the official  VFS website .

Will Davis, a popular travel YouTuber with over a million subscribers, known as‘ Trek Trendy’  wrote  on May 5 that he had obtained a visa to visit Sri Lanka , from the IVFS service.” after that each day I’ve been getting other tourists visas emailed to me complete with full names, address and passport info. What a massive data breach,” he said.

Ministry of Public security MOPS said the circulated data was dummy data. The random circulation of any data, even dummy data, to foreign visa applicants is a potential security risk said COPF. COPF saw this unauthorized disclosure of confidential visa application information as breach of Clause 6.1 of the Consortium Outsourcing Agreement.  This breach   could lead to the activation of Termination Clause 4, as specified in the Agreement.

COPF directed the Ministry to immediately attend to this  data breach. The Ministry said that KPMG  will provide an independent report on this matter. COPF then recommended  that  the Ministry, Immigration Department and the Sri Lankan Data Protection Authority  review the KPMG report and take immediate actions to ensure the complete security and protection of all data handled through the  VFS ETA .( continued)