Former Minister Sarath Weerasekera has chosen to take issue with my article published in the Sunday Times of April 19, 2026, under the column “In the National Interest”, which examined the implications of Udaya Gammanpila’s recent book on the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings. His response, however, appears to misconstrue both the argument advanced and the [...]

News

Easter attacks: Weerasekera misconstrues National Interest column’s concerns

View(s):

Former Minister Sarath Weerasekera has chosen to take issue with my article published in the Sunday Times of April 19, 2026, under the column “In the National Interest”, which examined the implications of Udaya Gammanpila’s recent book on the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings. His response, however, appears to misconstrue both the argument advanced and the concerns raised.

To restate the central point of that article: by targeting investigators such as Ravi Seneviratne and Shani Abeysekara with what can only be described as factual inaccuracies, the book functions less as a pursuit of truth and more as an exercise in political deflection. That critique stands.

It is therefore puzzling that Mr Weerasekera imputes to the article an allegation it never made—namely, that it sought to identify a specific individual as the “mastermind” or to insinuate a political conspiracy designed to bring Gotabaya Rajapaksa to power. The article did no such thing. Raising the legitimate and necessary question—who benefited politically from the climate of fear generated by the attacks—is not an accusation; it is a standard line of inquiry in any serious investigation into crimes of this magnitude.

Indeed, it is worth recalling that it was Mr Weerasekera himself who, on an earlier occasion, identified Naufer Maulawi as the mastermind, while Mr Gammanpila has now advanced the position that Zahran Hashim was the principal architect. These shifting assertions only reinforce the need for a careful, evidence-based approach rather than definitive proclamations made in the absence of a conclusive judicial finding.

The Easter Sunday attacks struck the nation without warning. Neither the Catholic community, the Muslim community, nor the broader Sri Lankan public anticipated the horror that unfolded. Yet subsequent disclosures made it abundantly clear that actionable intelligence had existed. That failure remains one of the most troubling aspects of this national tragedy.

Given the highly coordinated nature of the attacks, it is entirely reasonable—indeed essential—for both investigators and the public to ask who planned, financed, and directed such an operation. Any competent investigation must begin with motive, but it cannot end there. Motive must be tested against evidence, corroborated through independent lines of inquiry, and ultimately established to the standard required by law.

It is also inaccurate to assert, as Mr Weerasekera does, that all commissions of inquiry have conclusively determined that the attacks were solely an ISIS operation carried out by Zahran and Naufer. The findings of the Justice Janak de Silva Commission—by Mr Weerasekera’s own admission the most comprehensive examination to date—do not support such a definitive conclusion.

There are several additional points raised in Mr Weerasekera’s response with which I strongly disagree. However, constraints of space preclude a detailed rebuttal of each. What is more important is the broader principle at stake.

Seven years on, the failure to assemble the full picture of the Easter Sunday attacks is not merely an investigative lapse—it is a profound indictment of the Sri Lankan State. The inability, or unwillingness, to bring clarity to this tragedy has eroded public confidence and deepened the anguish of victims’ families. It has also created fertile ground for competing narratives, political opportunism, and, as seen in the present debate, attempts to deflect attention away from unresolved responsibilities.

If there is to be any meaning to the phrase “national interest”, it must begin with an unflinching commitment to truth. That requires protecting, not undermining, professional investigators; broadening, not narrowing, the scope of inquiry; and resisting the temptation to substitute political narratives for evidentiary findings.

Justice delayed is not merely justice denied—it is justice distorted. Sri Lanka owes the victims of Easter Sunday more than competing theories and partisan defences. It owes them the truth, established through credible investigation and due process, and the accountability of all those responsible—whoever they may be.

Anything less would be a disservice not only to the victims but also to the nation itself. (javidyusuf@gmail.com)

 

Share This Post

WhatsappDeliciousDiggGoogleStumbleuponRedditTechnoratiYahooBloggerMyspaceRSS

The best way to say that you found the home of your dreams is by finding it on Hitad.lk. We have listings for apartments for sale or rent in Sri Lanka, no matter what locale you're looking for! Whether you live in Colombo, Galle, Kandy, Matara, Jaffna and more - we've got them all!

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.