Physical Address
23,24,25 & 26, 2nd Floor, Software Technology Park India, Opp: Garware Stadium,MIDC, Chikalthana, Aurangabad, Maharashtra – 431001 India
When a tusker dies in Sri Lanka, grief is quickly followed by a practical worry: what happens to the ivory? A Sinhala-language Facebook post circulating after the death of the tusker Kavanthissa offers a confident answer. It says the law sets out a fixed routine in which the head is cut off, buried at a wildlife office, dug up months later and taken to court. Climate Fact Checks examined the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO) and recent cases. The practice the post describes does happen. The claim that the law requires it in every case does not hold up.
Claim: Sri Lankan law requires the head of every dead tusker to be separated and buried at a wildlife office, then exhumed and presented to court before the Department of Wildlife Conservation (DWC) can keep the skull and tusks.
Verdict: Partly accurate, but misleading. Heads of tuskers have been buried separately and later exhumed in specific cases, but the FFPO does not make this a universal legal procedure.
What does the post claim?
The post makes five claims:
- Wildlife officers must report the death of every wild elephant to court.
- When a tusker dies, its head is separated from the body so the tusks cannot be stolen.
- The skull, with the tusks, is buried securely on the premises of a nearby wildlife office.
- After several months, the skull is exhumed and presented to court.
- Once the court approves, the DWC keeps the skull and tusks in safe custody.
It also says the procedure differs for elephants with and without tusks, and presents the whole sequence as a legal safeguard against ivory theft.
What the law actually says
The FFPO is the main law governing wild elephants and their remains. It has been amended several times, including by Act No. 22 of 2009 and Act No. 7 of 2022, so the provisions below should be read in their current consolidated form. Older online versions, such as the LankaLaw text, carry amendments only up to 2005. The 2009 Act also replaced the title “Director” with “Director-General” throughout the Ordinance.
Section 17: disposal of elephants killed under licence. Section 17 was replaced by the 2009 amendment. It now deals only with elephants killed or taken in the exercise of a right conferred under the Ordinance. Section 17(2) reads: “Where the elephant killed or taken under section 13 is not the property of any person, the Director-General shall dispose of such elephant in such manner as is appropriate in the circumstances.” The provision leaves the method of disposal to the Director-General. It does not mention separating the head, burial or a court.
Section 18: the Director decides on disposal. This is the provision most relevant to the claim. It reads:
“Subject to such restrictions or conditions as may be prescribed, the Director may, by sale or otherwise, dispose of the tusks or the carcase, or any part of the carcase, of any dead elephant which is the property of the State.”
Section 18 gives the wildlife authority control over what happens to the tusks and carcass of a State-owned dead elephant. It does not require the head to be removed, name a place of burial, fix a period of burial or require the skull to be exhumed and shown to a court.
Section 21: no one else may touch the remains. Section 21(1) makes it an offence to take, dismember, remove, sell or buy the carcass, or any part of it, of a dead elephant that belongs to the State. Section 21(2) exempts remains already disposed of by the Director under Section 18. This is why a passer-by cannot lawfully saw off the tusks of a dead tusker, but it is a prohibition, not a burial procedure.
Section 16: reporting goes to officials, not courts. Section 16 requires a person who kills or takes an elephant in the exercise of a right granted under Section 13 (licences issued where elephants threaten life or property) to report it forthwith to a police officer or a prescribed officer and to the Director. Section 14, which once covered special licences to shoot crop-raiding elephants, was repealed in 2009. Section 16 applies only to these licensed killings or captures, not to every elephant death, and it names officials, not a court.
What a legal specialist says
Environmental and climate law specialist Maleesha Gunawardana told Climate Fact Checks that Section 18 sits at the core of how deceased tuskers are handled. In her reading, the provision confirms that a dead elephant and its tusks remain State property after death. The animal’s death, she said, does not turn its remains into res nullius, property belonging to nobody, which anyone could otherwise scavenge or sell.
That point explains why wildlife officers act quickly to secure tusks. It does not, on its own, establish the specific steps the post describes. Section 18 confers authority over disposal; it does not set out an operating procedure.
When do courts get involved?
Court involvement depends on the circumstances of a death, not on a blanket rule. When an elephant is suspected to have been shot, poisoned or electrocuted, the matter can become a criminal investigation, and a Magistrate may issue orders on the post-mortem, the preservation of evidence and the handling of the remains.
Two recent cases show how this works in practice. After Kavanthissa died on 16 October 2026, the DWC said it would seek a court order for a post-mortem examination. Environment Minister Dhammika Patabendi later told Parliament that the tusker died from gunshot injuries and that investigators were examining whether there was a deliberate plot to kill him. According to The Morning, the post-mortem was assigned to the University of Peradeniya’s veterinary division on court orders, the Criminal Investigation Department opened a separate investigation, and two suspects were remanded until 28 October. In the case of Deegadanthu 1, the Kalawewa tusker electrocuted in November 2024, the Kekirawa Magistrate ordered police to produce the two tusks in court as case productions.
The FFPO itself points to courts in specific situations. Section 20 allows a court, on convicting someone of killing an elephant, to order the carcass or tusks handed to a government officer for the State. Section 25 allows officers who seize tusks held unlawfully to apply to a Magistrate for an order on their disposal. Neither provision requires every elephant death to go before a court.
The inquest provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act (Sections 369 to 373) apply to human deaths. They do not create an inquest procedure for wild elephants.
Is the separate burial of a head real?
Yes, in particular cases. When the Kalawewa tusker Bharana was electrocuted by an illegal power line in July 2022, the DWC buried his head separately at the Galkiriyagama wildlife site. According to the Daily Mirror, the head with its tusks was exhumed about three years later so the department could preserve it for public display.
In Kavanthissa’s case, The Morning reported that after the last rites, the head and tusks were separated from the body and sent to be preserved, while the court directed that the carcass be buried securely on DWC land.
These cases confirm that the core of the post reflects something wildlife officers actually do. They also show that the purpose and sequence vary: security of the ivory, preservation of evidence, a court direction or later public display. That variation is consistent with an administrative or case-specific practice, not a single statutory procedure.
The post identifies a photograph as the skull of “Diga 01”. This appears to refer to Deegadanthu 1 of Kalawewa, but Climate Fact Checks could not independently verify what the photograph shows.
Whether the DWC follows an internal circular or standing order on the separate burial of tuskers’ heads is not publicly documented. If such a protocol exists, it would be departmental practice, not a requirement written into the FFPO.
Verdict: Partly accurate, but misleading
The post is right that the remains of a dead State-owned elephant are closely controlled by law, and that the heads of some tuskers have been buried separately and recovered later. It is wrong to present this as a legal requirement for every dead tusker. The FFPO gives the wildlife authority power to dispose of elephant remains and criminalises unauthorised handling of them, but it does not require heads to be separated, prescribe where or how long they must be buried, or require every death to be reported to a court. Courts become involved when a death is investigated or a case is filed, and their orders apply to that case alone.
References
https://web.facebook.com/groups/240603753731306?multi_permalinks=1791785495279783
https://lankalaw.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/1981Y17V567C-1.html
https://www.srilankalaw.lk/f/366-fauna-and-flora-protection-ordinance.html
https://lawnet.gov.lk/?p=97495
Expert team to investigate death of iconic tusker Kavantissa
Tusker Kavanthissa Succumbed to Gunshot Wounds: Minister
https://www.themorning.lk/articles/wUjxh93XCozYR5atEgcH
https://www.themorning.lk/articles/rhO4JCzhR8JEH9Yxl8qT
https://www.dailymirror.lk/breaking-news/Court-orders-probe-into-tusker-Kavantissas-death/108-352786
https://themorning.lk/articles/5LdIH9jKiwx32YeizqLW
https://www.dailymirror.lk/breaking-news/Elephant-Bharanas-head-with-tusks-exhumed/108-270594
Banner Image: Photo by Udara Karunarathna on Unsplash
Sections of this article may have been developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to support research, drafting and language refinement. All information has been reviewed, edited and verified by the author and editor to ensure accuracy, context and editorial integrity. Responsibility for the final content, interpretations and conclusions rests solely with the publisher.
