A group of civil society activists visited the proposed Miracle Dome City project site at Katunayake on Wednesday after reports and social media claims raised concerns about its environmental impact, the Daily Mirror reported.
The group inspected the premises and reviewed measures relating to environmental protection, land preservation and the development plans for the property.
Speaking to reporters afterwards, civil society representative Sanjaya Mahawatta said what the group observed did not correspond with the claims circulating online.
“We personally visited the Miracle Dome City site to review claims regarding environmental harm. Upon reviewing the property, we saw strong environmental standards and proactive preservation efforts,” Mahawatta said.
He also referred to a planned 1,500-bed facility, saying it was being established to provide accommodation and care for people who are poor and suffering from illness.
The Miracle Dome management said it remains committed to environmentally responsible development and land stewardship, and that planned activities at the site are continuing as scheduled.
Context
The Miracle Dome complex at Katunayake has been the subject of official scrutiny before, on financial rather than environmental grounds. The Sunday Times reported in December 2023 that the CID had opened a money-laundering inquiry into the flow of funds from abroad to the church associated with the complex, focused on the origin of money channelled into Sri Lanka to maintain it — a matter our archive set out in an August report on the church’s UK charity registration.
The Daily Mirror’s report does not connect Wednesday’s visit to that inquiry, and does not name the project’s owners or promoters.
Not reported
The Daily Mirror does not identify which organisation the activists represent, who invited or arranged the visit, or how many people took part. It does not state what the social media claims actually alleged, or who made them. No regulator is quoted: the report does not say whether the Central Environmental Authority has issued an approval or an environmental impact assessment for the project, whether any complaint has been lodged, or what the site’s permitted land use is. The scale, location and timeline of the development are not given beyond the 1,500-bed figure, and the report contains no response from anyone raising the environmental concerns.
Readers should note that every voice quoted in the report — the visiting activists and the project’s own management — is supportive of the project.
This article is single-sourced. No other verified newsroom had filed on the visit at the time of writing.
