Connect with us

Editorial

Easter Sunday carnage probe: More questions than answers

Published

on

Monday 21st April, 2025

The sixth anniversary of the Easter Sunday terror attacks, which claimed about 270 lives and left more than 500 persons injured, falls today. Those who have lost their near and dear ones in the tragedy are still crying out for justice. There have been four Presidents and three governments since the savage terror attacks, yet the search for the masterminds behind them is still ongoing.

A few weeks ago, the incumbent NPP government had the public believe that it would reveal something earth-shattering about the terror masterminds soon, but it is now humming a different tune. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has reportedly handed over the report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) that probed the Easter Sunday terror attacks to the CID. We thought the CID had received it much earlier!

There have been more questions than answers regarding the Easter Sunday terror attacks, with a host of claims, counterclaims, about-turns, conspiracy theories, and above all, partisan politics complicating both the investigative process and the quest for justice.

There are two main schools of thought in respect of the Easter Sunday carnage. One insists that the National Thowheed Jamaath (NTJ), which carried out the bombings, was used by some politicians and intelligence bigwigs loyal to them to achieve a political goal whereas the other claims that the NTJ led by Zahran Hashim unleashed terror at the behest of the ISIS. The proponents of the first school of thought have been influenced by a call made by a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) that probed the Easter Sunday carnage, in 2019, for further investigations to ascertain whether there had been an attempt ‘to create and instil fear and uncertainty in the country in the lead-up to the presidential election to be held later in the year’. Their opponents have offered a different narrative.

On 19 May 2021, the then Minister of Public Security Sarath Weerasekra told Parliament that the US Federal Bureau of Investigation had confirmed that Moulavi Mohamed Ibrahim Mohamad Naufer was the mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks. He said so in response to a statement made by Attorney General Dappula De Livera the previous day that there had been ‘a grand conspiracy’ behind the terror attacks.

Maithripala Sirisena, who was the President at the time of the Easter Sunday bombings in 2019, has said that he conveyed some vital information about the tragedy to the government. He has refused to reveal it to the public, and the government has chosen to remain silent on his claim. BBS General Secretary Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thera has said he knows who the Easter Sunday terror mastermind is, but he will divulge that information only to the President and the Defence Secretary. When Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa, who was a member of the PSC that probed the Eastern Sunday carnage in 2019, was in the Opposition, he told BBC that according to ‘investigative evidence’ he was privy to, India had been behind the terror attacks. He is now the Cabinet Spokesman. It will be interesting to know the other government leaders’ position on his allegation. Curiously, the CID has not recorded a statement from him on his very serious claim.

Meanwhile, the aforesaid PCoI report contains a Chapter on evidence given by eleven prominent persons, who categorically stated they believed that there had been a foreign hand or conspiracy behind the Easter Sunday carnage. Those witnesses are Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, former President Sirisena, former Minister Rauff Hakeem, former Minister Rishad Bathiudeen, former Governor Azath Salley, SJB MP Mujibur Rahman, former SIS Director SDIG Nilantha Jayawardena, former STF Commandant M. R. Latiff, former Chief of Defence Staff Ravindra Wijegunaratne, former SDIG CID Ravi Seneviratne and former CID Director SSP Shani Abeysekera. Claiming that their statements were mere ipse dixits (assertions made but not proven), the PCoI report has said that no such foreign link was found (p. 472). The Commission should have dug deeper before arriving at such a conclusion. It has, however, recommended that certain identified parties be further investigated. This has not been done. Some of the aforementioned witnesses have since made public statements that contradict their testimonies before the PCoI, and they owe the public an explanation.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Editorial

Indelible ink and tainted records

Published

on

Thursday 25th June, 2026

The government has decided to scrap the long-held legal requirement to mark voters’ fingers with indelible ink at polling stations. It is in overdrive to introduce necessary legal amendments, we are told. The reasons given for its decision is that the practice of using indelible ink causes “operational inefficiencies” and “significant additional costs”. The Election Commission has claimed that the scrapping of the indelible ink requirement is its brainchild.

The JVP-NPP government is busy amending election laws and working on a new electoral system while doing everything in its power to postpone the Provincial Council (PC) elections further. If only the election monitors had continued to pressure the government to hold the PC polls rather than focusing on relatively inconsequential matters.

The use of indelible ink is not a silver bullet capable of preventing electoral malpractices, and therefore one can argue that its discontinuation may not render the electoral system any more vulnerable to practices, such as multiple voting. But whether it is prudent to do away with such safeguards against election malpractices, relying solely on the voter identification requirement is a moot point, given the fact that none of the main political parties are respecters of people’s franchise.

The UNP resorted to election malpractices and unleashed barbaric violence to retain its hold on power in the 1980s, when it used a heavily rigged referendum to make a general election disappear. The SJB, an offshoot of the UNP, is widely viewed as sharing the latter’s political DNA. The SLFP and its allies also rigged elections. In 1999, they chased away polling agents and stuffed ballot boxes in full view of the police to win the North Western PC polls. Some of the SLFP organisers responsible for violating election laws in that despicable manner are currently in the SLPP. The TNA fully endorsed the election boycott ordered by the LTTE in 2005 and even announced it. The JVP employed brutal methods such as shooting, beheading and quartering as part of its campaign to sabotage elections in the late 1980s. What guarantee is there that such political parties are any different from the proverbial cat that calmly held a lamp on a dining table only to revert to its old ways at the sight of a mouse?

As for the legal requirement of national identity cards (NICs) and other proofs of identity for voting, one may recall that the JVP seized the NICs of thousands of people during its reign of terror in the late 1980s. Some of the current JVP leaders have declared that they will not let go of power. They stand accused of working towards a one-party rule.

The Cabinet of Ministers is reported to have decided to remove provisions related to the use of indelible ink from election laws, while retaining voter identification requirements. Accordingly, the Presidential Elections Act, the Parliamentary Elections Act, the Provincial Council Elections Act, the Local Authorities Elections Ordinance, etc., are to be amended. One can only hope that the government will not turn amending election laws into a mega political project and use it as a pretext to postpone elections it is reluctant to face.

Most of all, a watchful eye needs to be kept on the amendments to be introduced, for there is no guarantee that the amendment Bills will not be stuffed with sections without judicial sanction to further the interests of the government. It has been revealed that when the Parliamentary Election Act of 1981 was amended in 1988, the words, “any member” (of a political party) were surreptitiously inserted thereinto after ratification to provide for the appointment of persons of party leaders choice to fill National List vacancies. In 2017, during the UNP-led Yahapalana government, several sections were incorporated into the Provincial Council Elections amendment Bill arbitrarily at the committee stage to provide for postponing the PC polls indefinitely. Controversy surrounds the manner in which the Online Safety Bill was “passed” in 2024. It was declared ratified amidst a noisy protest in the House.

Indelible ink is used by the countries in this part of the world as an antidote to multiple voting. Other democracies, especially in the West, have no need for it as they have reliable voter identification systems, which are however not totally foolproof. It is not prudent to presume that the franchise and the electoral process are invulnerable in this country, given the tainted records of the political parties that remain unremorseful. Hence, it is imperative that all safeguards against election malpractices be retained and strengthened.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Democratic rights crushed under a juggernaut

Published

on

Wednesday 24th June, 2026

The JVP-NPP government yesterday did not scruple to deprive the Opposition of an opportunity to debate some vital issues affecting the judiciary, in Parliament. The Opposition made a request to the Speaker, under Standing Orders, for a debate on the vacancies numbering four each in the Supreme Court (SC) and the Court of Appeal (CA) and an alleged move to raise the retirement ages of the SC and CA judges. But the government raised objections and put paid to the Opposition’s efforts, triggering protests in the House. It was obvious that the government members did not want even a brief debate on the aforementioned issues as they could not defend their position.

Some Opposition MPs rightly pointed out that the judicial power of the people was exercised by the legislature through courts, etc., according to the Constitution, and therefore Parliament was duty bound to debate issues, such as vacancies in the judiciary and a questionable government move to increase some judges’ retirement ages. Leader of the House and Minister Bimal Rathnayake took a swipe at the Opposition, recalling an attempt by some MPs to summon the Supreme Court judges before a parliamentary committee over a judgement during the previous government. True, the members of the SLPP-UNP government, currently in the Opposition, undermined the judiciary by criticising judges whose rulings were not to their liking and by postponing elections in violation of court orders. But two wrongs do not make a right.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka, the Colombo High Court Lawyers’ Association, etc., have severely criticised the alleged government move to extend the retirement ages of judges of the SC and the CA and urged it to fill the vacancies in those two courts. The Opposition has gone to the extent of claiming that the government is trying to leverage judges’ promotions, etc., to further its political interests at the expense of the integrity of the judiciary. These are issues that must be debated in Parliament urgently.

As the dynamic balance of Vata, Pitta and Kapha is to a person’s wellbeing, in Ayurveda, so is the harmonious functioning of the three branches of government, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, to a country’s democratic health. In both cases imbalance invites trouble. Unfortunately, no government has fully adhered to the principle of the separation of powers during the last several decades, and the Executive Presidency has made a bad situation worse. All Executive Presidents have meddled with the legislature and the judiciary. ‘Change’ that the current administration promised during its election campaigns has become pie in the sky. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake stands accused of having the legislature under his thumb and undermining the judiciary.

JVP/NPP politicians never miss an opportunity to boast of their two-thirds majority. Minister Rathnayake yesterday reminded the Opposition of the government’s supermajority. A common trait of all Sri Lankan politicians is that they let power go to their heads. Steamroller majorities are apparently jinxed in this country. Intoxicated with power, governments exude arrogance, become aggressive, suppress dissent and dig their own political graves in the process. No government with a supermajority has secured a second term at a free and fair election in this country. The J. R. Jayewardene government, which had a five-sixth majority obtained under the first-past-the-post system, retained its hold on power in 1982 through a heavily-rigged referendum. The UNP won the 1989 general election mainly because of the JVP’s reign of terror, which prevented many people from voting and created a situation where the UNP could stuff ballot boxes. Two-thirds majorities could not save the SLFP-led United Front government (1970-1977), the Mahinda Rajapaksa government (2010-2015) and the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government. Such is the transient nature of political power and huge parliamentary majorities.

The JVP-NPP government can abuse its parliamentary majority to bulldoze its way through, but there is no way it can justify its refusal to allow issues affecting judicial independence to be debated in Parliament. It ought to remember that the power of the people is far greater than the people in power, as a saying goes.

Continue Reading

Editorial

FCID’s big catch

Published

on

Tuesday 23rd June, 2026

The Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) has uncovered a large-scale foreign exchange fraud and arrested a Colombo-based businessman who is reported to have transferred millions of US dollars out of the country through a large number of shell companies since 2023. He has been allegedly involved in money laundering and illegal transfer of funds for phantom imports, according to media reports. The FCID deserves praise for its successful raid, but there is reason to believe that it is only scratching the surface of the problem. Much more needs to be done.

There are many other foreign currency racketeers who deprive Sri Lanka’s banking system of a colossal amount of dollars annually through various illegal operations. Among them are many exporters. Public Security Minister Ananda Wijepala told Parliament about two weeks ago that investigations had revealed that a large number of import-export entities operated only for short periods of around six months. He said the Customs had identified 105 local companies operating 227 accounts in 13 banks, with funds transferred overseas on 26,108 occasions between 01 January, 2023 and 30 September, 2025, for phantom imports. Besides, there are many businessmen who park most of their export proceeds overseas and resort to unlawful practices, such as misinvoicing, to mislead the Customs.

Informal fund transfer systems like hawala and undiyal have thrived under successive governments due to better exchange rates offered by them, faster transfers, virtual absence of documentation and, most of all, secrecy. They facilitate unregulated forex flows with impunity, much to the detriment of the economy. It has been reported that many expatriate Sri Lankan workers use these informal channels to transfer funds.

The country gains only when migrant workers send remittances through official channels, for foreign currency enters the banking system; the Central Bank can accumulate reserves, and remittance inflows appear in official balance-of-payments statistics. When remittances are diverted through hawala or undiyal networks, foreign exchange bypasses the banking system, distorting balance-of-payments data, reducing official reserve accumulation and making the Central Bank lose regulatory oversight on foreign currency flows. These informal fund transfer systems not only take their toll on the country’s foreign currency reserves but also pose a threat to national security as they are used for funding illegal activities including terrorism. Curiously, there has been no all-out effort to neutralise these networks.

One may recall that when the first signs of a foreign currency crisis appeared in 2021, the media raised the issue of unregulated forex flows through informal fund transfer systems with the then government leaders, who sought to make light of the situation, claiming that there was no need for action against such operations. A few months later, the country was left with no forex even for essential imports, and those leaders had to outrun protesters. The present-day leaders are likely to face a similar fate unless illegal fund transfer operations are disrupted and everything possible is done to build foreign currency reserves. which are under tremendous pressure.

There is a pressing need for stronger laws to deal with foreign currency racketeers. The abolition of the Exchange Control Act of 1953 and the introduction of the Foreign Exchange Act of 2017 during the UNP-led Yahapalana government have stood foreign currency racketeers in good stead, as we pointed out in a previous editorial comment. The Exchange Control Act was the primary legislative framework governing foreign currency, gold, securities, and cross-border financial transactions in Sri Lanka. The Foreign Exchange Act introduced under the pretext of liberalising the foreign currency flow converted non-bailable criminal offences into civil offences. The incumbent government should seriously consider restoring the Exchange Control Act if it is to deal with racketeers effectively and shore up foreign currency reserves.

Continue Reading

Trending