FactCheck.lk is an online platform run by Verité Research (VR). Details about FactCheck.lk’s operations are available at: http://factcheck.lk/who-we-are

Details about VR are available at: https://www.veriteresearch.org/about-verite/

VR is a privately owned think tank. VR's status as a private company and other details are provided on the Contact Us page: https://www.veriteresearch.org/contact_us

FactCheck.lk is transparent about who is operating its operations (i.e. Verite Research), and is transparent about its funding and investors. This is detailed here: http://factcheck.lk/who-we-are

1. FactCheck.lk, the first-ever national fact-checking platform in Sri Lanka, was initiated in September 2018 on Facebook. The FactCheck.lk website was launched in March 2019. FactCheck.lk was implemented with the objective of improving the space of public understanding and information in Sri Lanka and thereby helping to hold high-level decision-makers answerable for the public statements they make.

2. FactCheck.lk has a core team of eleven individuals, given at: http://factcheck.lk/our-team. In addition, FactCheck.lk has a large group of researchers who research and write fact checks on a rotational basis under the guidance of the core team and subject to the approval of the editor-in-chief.

3. FactCheck.lk was set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking. VR, the parent organisation of FactCheck.lk, provides research and strategic analysis for Asia in the areas of economics, politics, law, and media. More details on VR's research and outputs are available here: https://www.veriteresearch.org/our-work/

4. In the context of its objectives, FactCheck.lk's goals for the coming year include:

a. Publishing weekly fact checks on statements made by high-level decision-makers that are publicly relevant and educational.

b. Increase the public reach of the platform through mainstream and social media. Currently, FactCheck.lk’s weekly fact checks are published on the front page of Sri Lanka’s most-read English newspaper Daily Mirror. The most read Sinhala newspaper website also carries our fact-checks. In addition, popular social media sites share our fact-checks when we post them on our site. We hope to expand our reach by disseminating our findings on electronic media, where possible as well.  

FactCheck.lk was set up exclusively for the purpose of fact checking. The organisation has clearly explained how many people work on its fact-checking work - there is a core group of 8 individuals, as well as researchers who voluntarily research and contribute fact checks as guided by the core team and editor-in-chief.

Fact checks published in the last year, including the most recent fact checks, can be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/ or on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/factchecklka/ or in the document attached.

In 2020, FactCheck.lk was the first platform in Sri Lanka to have introduced a spin-off series of fact checks such as BudgetCheck, which live fact-checked statements made during the 2021 Budget Speech in parliament. In 2021, the team also live fact-checked the 2022 Budget Speech in parliament (see http://factcheck.lk/blog/budget-check-2021 and http://factcheck.lk/blog/budget-check-2022). FactCheck.lk will continue this series and the practice of live fact-checking during the annual reading of the Budget Speech in parliament.

All fact checks are published in English, Sinhala, and Tamil. 

In the previous assessment, some irregularities in terms of whether or not they are published weekly have been observed. Factcheck.lk has since clarified that the dates were not actually showing the date of publication, but the dates the statements were made. The dates of publication are to be gathered from their Facebook page instead.

As such, Factcheck.lk is generally compliant but they should make all of such information clearer in the context of each factcheck - readers should not have to go to another site in order to tell when each factcheck has been published. Factcheck.lk has indicated that their website is being updated, and this is something that they will address in the new website.

This is compliant. Most of the fact checks published are related to issues that can impact the well-being and welfare of the general public as well as organisations in Sri Lanka.

FactCheck.lk does not have any relationships to state or political individuals or parties. FactCheck.lk has also never received any funding or support from local or foreign state or political sources. FactCheck.lk’s sources of funding can be viewed by the public at: http://factcheck.lk/who-we-are

FactCheck.lk has a number of posts on the claims made by various political parties and politicians. This demonstrates their independence and they do not seem to be guided or controlled by any political party or politician.

FactCheck.lk does not receive funding from local or foreign state or political sources. 

This is compliant as the organisation has clearly explained the sources of their funding.

1. http://factcheck.lk/claim/community-physicians

2. http://factcheck.lk/claim/asela-gunawardana

3. http://factcheck.lk/claim/mahinda-rajapaksa-15

4. http://factcheck.lk/claim/bandula-gunawardana-6

5. http://factcheck.lk/claim/basil-rajapaksa

6. http://factcheck.lk/claim/patali-champika-ranawaka-14

7. http://factcheck.lk/claim/ruwan-wijewardene-4

8. http://factcheck.lk/claim/anura-kumara-dissanayake-7

9. http://factcheck.lk/claim/sm-marikkar

10. http://factcheck.lk/claim/ajith-nivard 

The selected fact checks are a representative sample of fact checks published during this year. They comprise checks on statements from members of most of the political parties and other high-level government officials, including officials from the health sector, in Sri Lanka with a wide distribution of verdicts. Each fact check explains how FactCheck.lk arrived at its verdict. Each check provides details of both the reasoning and all sources used to evaluate the claim.

FactCheck.lk’s process of maintaining coherent standards across its fact checks can be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process.

The fact checks are based on claims made by a variety of sources, including politicians from different parties. FactCheck.lk has explained quite well, the sources used to check on each claim. There is also a variety of conclusions, so there does not seem to be any partisanship in the fact checks.

FactCheck.lk’s process of selecting claims to check can be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process 

The processes used by FactCheck.lk to select claims to check as well as how they check claims are well-explained and clear. Based on the fact checks published in the past six months, they do appear to practise what they put forward as their processes for factchecking.

FactCheck.lk provides contextual information about the sources that it quotes, including the relevant interests. For instance, in one fact check (http://www.factcheck.lk/claim/national-freedom-front), the following reflection was written about the source used to fact check a claim "The proposed 20A tabled in parliament, among other things, specifically removes such companies from the types of entities listed under the purview of the auditor general (for a side-by-side comparison of the exact wording, see www.factcheck.lk). That means, for example, entities such as Sri Lankan Airlines, Sri Lanka Telecom, LECO, Lanka Sathosa and Litro Gas Lanka, would be specifically excluded from the constitutionally assigned audit purview of the Auditor General." Links to sources used are also provided, so that the public can also evaluate for themselves the authenticity and potential biases of the sources.

Based on the fact checks published over the past year, FactCheck.lk publishes fact checks based on claims from a variety of parties and political candidates, including the Prime Minister and President of Sri Lanka. Its conclusions on whether the claims are false, true, or partly true have been mixed - in other words, no particular party or individuals have been concluded to be consistently true or consistently false. This is good evidence of the applicant's impartiality and transparency. It does not show any particular for certain parties or individuals.

FactCheck.lk does not endorse any political parties or candidates, nor does it participate in any electoral campaigns of political parties or candidates. VR does not have an explicit policy of prohibiting staff from supporting a political party or candidate. VR understands that it cannot practically constrain fact-checkers from engaging in external activities such as advocacy or publicising their views on policy issues and is mindful of not unduly restricting its staff’s freedom of expression, among other rights. However, it ensures that FactCheck.lk remains non-partisan at all times, including in the selection, assessment, and dissemination of fact checks. To maintain neutrality and filter personal biases as intended with this criterion VR has an alternative process in place (see http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process). First, the authorship of a fact check is never limited to a single fact-checker. Second, in addition to a fact check being produced with the combined effort of several contributors, it goes through multiple reviews (minimum three reviews) by VR’s staff and directors. This entrenched process of triple reviews helps to ensure that the biases of any single person does not undermine the objectivity of any fact check. FactCheck.lk also encourages responses to its published fact checks and seeks to engage those who contest any fact check.

VR’s standard contracts for full-time employees (template attached), includes a CONFLICT OF INTEREST section, which prevents employees from engaging in any activity, including engaging any political parties, that undermines the interests of VR. One such interest is the maintenance of VR's position as an independent research institution. Any activity that undermines VR's independence is construed as a violation of this clause. The clause states: ‘The [employee] shall not directly or indirectly, either in his/her own name or through the agency of another person undertake or engage in any business, profession, occupation or activity (including engaging any political parties) that undermines and/or conflicts with the interests of the Company and/or the [employee]’s obligations under this Agreement.’ Part-time fact-checkers are held to the same standards.

FactCheck.lk does not endorse any political parties or candidates, nor does it participate in any electoral campaigns of political parties or candidates. VR does not have an explicit policy of prohibiting staff from supporting a political party or candidate. VR understands that it cannot practically constrain fact-checkers from engaging in external activities such as advocacy or publicising their views on policy issues and is mindful of not unduly restricting its staff’s freedom of expression, among other rights. However, it ensures that FactCheck.lk remains non-partisan at all times, including in the selection, assessment, and dissemination of fact checks. To maintain neutrality and filter personal biases as intended with this criterion VR has an alternative process in place. First, the authorship of a fact check is never limited to a single fact-checker. Second, in addition to a fact check being produced with the combined effort of several contributors, it goes through multiple reviews (minimum three reviews) by VR’s staff and directors. This entrenched process of triple reviews helps to ensure that the biases of any single person does not undermine the objectivity of any fact check. FactCheck.lk also encourages responses to its published fact checks and seeks to engage those who contest any fact check. Also, see http://factcheck.lk/our-process-fact-check for our statement on non-partisanship. 

VR’s standard contracts for full-time employees (template attached), includes a CONFLICT OF INTEREST section, which prevents employees from engaging in any activity, including engaging any political parties, that undermines the interests of VR. One such interest is the maintenance of VR's position as an independent research institution. Any activity that undermines VR's independence is construed as a violation of this clause. The clause states: ‘The [employee] shall not directly or indirectly, either in his/her own name or through the agency of another person undertake or engage in any business, profession, occupation or activity (including engaging any political parties) that undermines and/or conflicts with the interests of the Company and/or the [employee]’s obligations under this Agreement.’ Part-time fact-checkers are held to the same standards.

In the earlier round of assessment, FactCheck.lk was asked to elaborate its policy on non-partisanship for staff and how it ensures that the organisation meets this criteria. In the appeal, Verite Research has explained an alternative process in place to ensure the non-partisanship and neutrality of each factcheck. This is acceptable, but it is not explained in the link provided (i.e. http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process?q=%2Four-process) - please include them under 'Research and Writing' so that it is clear that each factcheck will be non-partisan and objective.

In the earlier round of assessment, FactCheck.lk was asked to elaborate its policy on non-partisanship for staff and how it ensures that the organisation meets this criteria. In the appeal, Verite Research has explained an alternative process in place to ensure the non-partisanship and neutrality of each factcheck. Factcheck.lk has since updated their process to articulate how they ensure the objectivity of factchecks through multiple reviewers (i.e. http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process?q=%2Four-process).

FactCheck.lk’s process of selecting and providing sources can also be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process 

This is compliant; the applicant identifies and provides links to all sources that are used as evidence in their fact checks, which allows any member of the public to replicate the fact check for themselves if they wish to.

FactCheck.lk’s process of selecting and providing sources can also be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process

FactCheck.lk used many primary sources of evidence, including original census tables and statistics. When they are unavailable, they used secondary sources such as annual reports and financial reports and provide the links to these reports.

FactCheck.lk’s process of selecting and providing sources can also be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process

There is usually more than one source used in their fact checks, except for claims that involve one only source.

FactCheck.lk’s process of selecting and providing sources can also be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process

Beyond the one factcheck raised in the earlier assessment, the principle behind this criteria in accordance with IFCN request factcheckers to make it clear the sources used, and there should also be avenues for others to pose questions about the sources. This is generally compliant.

FactCheck.lk is an online platform run by Verité Research. Verité Research is a leading contributor of interdisciplinary research and dialogue in Sri Lanka. It is registered as a private company under the Companies Act, No. 07 of 2007 (registration number: PV 72318). See legal registration attached. Factcheck.lk was launched as part of VR’s broader mandate to provide data-driven analysis.

FactCheck.lk clearly states the legal form of its registration as well as its funders. As it also clearly states on its website, "During the first year of the FactCheck.lk Terminal until April 30, 2019 , it was financially supported by grants from International Media Support (IMS) . Since then, Internews and IMS have continued to support it. Verité Research maintains the FactCheck Terminal during these non-financial support periods, and we again invite everyone who appreciates FactCheck to contribute."

(http://factcheck.lk/who-we-are)

Please see http://www.factcheck.lk/who-we-are for details on FactCheck.lk's parent organisation and sources of funding.

The organization operates under Verité Research - this is clearly stated and the funding sources are also shared.

Please see FactCheck.lk's organisational structure at: http://factcheck.lk/our-team 

All the personnel working on FactCheck.lk are listed and it is also clear that they work full-time on factchecks. There are clear descriptions on how editorial control is exercised and how the team works on fact checks.

Please see the key individuals involved in FactCheck.lk at: http://factcheck.lk/our-team 

The professional biographies of its full-time staff have been clearly listed. Their educational as well as professional backgrounds are detailed - this is important for transparency.

FactCheck.lk provides multiple means for people to reach out to us. On the website, we allow anyone to submit a statement on a claim they would like us to fact check and provide a form that readers can fill in to reach the editorial team (see http://www.factcheck.lk/contact). Outside of this, people can also contact us via a generic email address, via our social media, and WhatsApp service. 

The applicant provides three means for anyone to reach them. On it's website, they allow anyone to submit a statement on a claim they should fact check, and users can also submit anonymously if they like. Under their page detailing their policy on corrections to fact checks, they have provided an email for users to reach the editorial team on any other issues, including feedback if they feel that their fact checks have been unfair or inaccurate. Last but not least, there is also a form that users can fill in to reach the editorial team.

FactCheck.lk’s detailed methodology can be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process

FactCheck.lk's ratings and definitions can be viewed at: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-ratings 

FactCheck.lk has detailed its methodology in selecting claims to fact check, as well as how they go about conducting the research and writing. Part of the process of selecting claims to fact check includes reviewing submissions from the public on statements they should check.

The organization is guided by three key criteria in selecting claims to fact check: a) the scope / theme of the statement; b) The current state and orientation of the public discourse on the subject; and c) The value that can be added to FactCheck for that conversation. Based on a sample of fact checks gathered (see attached), they do appear to be aligned with the criteria they have articulated. Where applicable, they have also identified reflections to contribute to ongoing discourse on the issue. Many of these points appear as 'Notes' at the end of each fact check. See: http://www.factcheck.lk/claim/national-freedom-front-2 for an example.

“In their appeal, the applicant has submitted evidence to show that where possible, they have considered relevant evidence that appears to support or undermine each claim, and also showed that in some instances, it was not possible as there is only one main source of evidence. Factcheck.lk do include diverse sources of evidence across their fact-checks, and as such, it is compliant.”

Based on a randomised sample of fact checks, the fact checks is consistent in assessing the merits of the evidence used and applying them across multiple parties who have made claims. Claims made by the same individuals, for instance, the President of Sri Lanka, have been concluded with a variety of ratings (true, false, partly true) and within each fact check, the same standards to assess the merits of the evidence have been applied.

The earlier assessment found that the practice of contacting those who made the claims is not adopted by Factcheck.lk, and as stated in the earlier assessment, it may be due to the fact that many of the claims made were from politicians and public figures. The following is a response from Factcheck.lk in their appeal:

"All statements fact checked by the platform are made by politicians and/or government officials. Therefore, FactCheck.lk prefers not to contact these high-profile officials for two reasons. First, in the instance where a high-profile official is informed ahead of time that their statement may be classified as false, that official may attempt to bring undue pressure on the Daily Mirror newspaper that publishes the factcheck on its front page. This potential threat to our main publication qualifies within the exemption IV stated above. Second, our methodology includes verifying claims made by high-profile official using publicly available data. Unless there is a problem in finding the required data, or in interpreting the claim—in which cases we do have the freedom to reach out—FactCheck.lk has no need to reach out to the person in order to carry out the fact check."

These are very reasonable and legitimate justifications. Additionally, because of the public nature of these claims, I would add that it is not necessary to make such contact in order to seek supporting evidence. However, for factchecks in the future that does not involve politicians or government officials (i.e. non-public figures) it is recommended as best practice as such contact can help factcheckers to seek additional supporting evidence that have been used to make the claims, although it is not always possible with online claims.

Readers can submit claims on FactCheck.lk’s landing page: http://www.factcheck.lk/, and by tagging and messaging us on social media.

FactCheck.lk’s process for the selection of submitted statements is detailed for users here: http://www.factcheck.lk/our-process

The applicant allows users to submit claims to fact check, and users can also do so anonymously. Additionally, the policies for selecting claims to fact check are also clearly spelt out.

FactCheck.lk’s correction’s policy can be viewed at: http://factcheck.lk/right-of-reply 

FactCheck.lk's corrections policy are clearly detailed on its website. They are easily accessible and visible, and contains clear definitions what is covered/not covered.

The policy is clear in terms of the scope of its work, and how major mistakes and corrections are handled.

When FactCheck.lk received a comment on a fact check that indicated an error, the error was immediately addressed. If FactCheck.lk felt that no error was made, the comment was responded to with a more detailed explanation of the verdict.

If a speaker issued a request for correction, the request was published and responded to. Each response contained either a correction or a detailed explanation of why the verdict was not changed. Following are the most recent responses/corrections issued by FactCheck.lk:

 Anura Kumara Dissanayake:

Initial post: http://factcheck.lk/claim/anura-kumara-dissanayake-7

Correction request and response: https://www.dailymirror.lk/news-features/MP-Anura-Kumara-Dissanayake-responds-to-Factcheck/131-226201

FactCheck.lk received a clarificatory response from MP Dissanayaka stating that debt amortisation (capital repayment of loans) should be included in total government expenditure. In a reply, FactCheck.lk noted two errors made by the MP in his reply and original statement—the miscategorisation of loan amortisation as expenditure and the inaccuracy of the miscategorised calculation with regard to the budget tabled in parliament. In light of the above, the response by the MP did not provide any new information to justify updating the verdict.

 Wimal Weerawansa

Initial post: http://factcheck.lk/claim/wimal-weerawansa-4

Correction request and response: https://www.dailymirror.lk/slide-1/Industries-Minister-Wimal-Weerawansa-responds-to-FactCheck/329-194814

A correction was requested by Industries Minister Wimal Weerawansa’s media secretary stating that part of the statement made by the minister had been omitted by FactCheck.lk. In a reply, FactCheck.lk pointed out multiple sources corroborating the minister’s statement checked by the team and the contradictory response sent by the minister. In the absence of any additional information, which we received to consider correcting the verdict, the verdict remained the same.

 Gotabaya Rajapaksa

Initial post: http://factcheck.lk/claim/gotabaya-rajapaksa-4 

Correction request and response: http://www.dailymirror.lk/news-features/Right-of-Reply-Presidents-Media-Office-response-to-FactCheck/131-184089 

A correction was requested by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, based on an estimate provided by an academic. In response, FactCheck.lk further clarified the logic of the check and verdict, and concluded that there was, as of yet, no credible published statistics to support the claim. The verdict remained the same.

 Nimal Lanza

Initial post and response - website: http://www.factcheck.lk/claim/nimal-lanza

Initial post and response - social media: https://www.facebook.com/factchecklka/posts/456001561724704?comment_id=456034538388073¬if_id=1575633599001717¬if_t=feed_comment&ref=notif

It was revealed that the media source used for the statement had misreported the claim of then State Minister Nimal Lanza of the United People's Freedom Alliance. In response, FactCheck.lk issued a clarification and changed the verdict of the check to Void.

The evidence provided by the applicant shows a good variety of how calls to correct its fact checks were handled. In only one case, the applicant has made corrections and posted public announcements about the corrections via its Facebook page. On its website, the original and the corrected version were both displayed.

FactCheck.lk is not an existing signatory. 

This is not applicable as FactCheck.lk is not an existing signatory.

FactCheck.lk is not a fact-checking unit of a media company, it is the fact-checking unit of a research company.

FactCheck.lk is not part of a media company but a research company. This is not applicable to them.