Sunday Times 2
Easter attacks: Final response to Javid Yusuf
View(s):Although I do not wish to continue countering Javid Yusuf’s theories on the Easter Sunday attacks, I was compelled to respond to his statement headlined “Weerasekera misconstrues National Interest Column’s concerns” (published in the Sunday Times on May 3).
Yusuf says his article never sought to identify a specific individual as the “mastermind” or insinuate a political conspiracy designed to bring Gotabaya into power. However, Yusuf’s article (the Sunday Times, April 19th, page 10) begins as follows: “Gammanpila appears to be protecting a specific political ecosystem rather than uncovering the mastermind.” So what Yusuf says is that there is still a mastermind to be uncovered. He further says, “No one disputes that Zaharan and his group carried out the attack. The real question, and the one the Catholic Church led by Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith has consistently raised, is about the “Grand Mastermind”. ” The church will not accept a manufactured closure,” Yusuf quotes the Cardinal and says, “Victims do not want to know who wore the vests; they want to know who enabled the path to churches and hotels.”
Hence, Yusuf’s statement that he never sought to identify a specific individual as the mastermind is not correct.
When the real mastermind (as per local and foreign investigations), Naufer Maulavi (Zaharan is dead) is in jail awaiting trial, and when Yusuf and the Catholic Church say that the “Grand Mastermind” is still not uncovered, who gets frustrated? Mainly the victims of the attack. If the victims know that the culprits are in jail and legal action is being taken, it would in a way ease their pain. But by sowing the seeds of doubt in them about a hidden mastermind (without any evidence for 7 years), people like Yusuf are helping to perpetuate the agony/pain of the unfortunate victims.
It is true that I have, even in parliament, identified Naufer Maulavi as the mastermind. Since Gammanpila has said the mastermind was Zaharan, Yusuf says “these shifting assertions” only reinforce the need for a careful evidence-based approach. Those who have studied ISIS and NTJ know that Zaharan and Naufer were the top two in the NTJ, which carried out the attack. Gammanpila says Zaharan was the mastermind because he planned and carried out the attack, but for me it was Naufer Maulavi because it was he who drew Zaharan to ISIS ideology. (Naufer even got Zaharan to marry his wife’s sister’s daughter, Hadia.) Zaharan is no more, and the only remaining mastermind is Naufer, who is in custody. Even the Los Angeles Court identified Naufer as the 2nd Emir.
Yusuf says given the highly coordinated nature of the attack, it is entirely reasonable/essential for both investigators and the public to ask who planned/financed/directed such an operation. Do we need to remind Yusuf again and again that even the FBI has found out, after two years of extensive investigation, that it was the ISIS Muslim extremists who planned, financed, and directed the attack? Raj Patel, the head of the FBI team, won the Best International Investigation Award of the year. The US Dept of Justice too confirms the same. When the world-renowned investigation unit says as above, on what grounds does Yusuf cast doubt that the one who planned, financed, and directed the attack is still at large?
Yusuf says the Justice Janak De Silva Commission does not support that the attack was solely an ISIS operation.
Yusuf must read the report carefully. Chapter 30 of the commission report is the conclusion. It says Zaharan; Rilwan (Zaharan’s brother); Shaini (Zaharan’s brother); Ilham (Ibrahim’s son who carried out the Kingsbury hotel attack); and Inshaf (Ibrahim’s son who carried out the Shangri-La attack). Jameel (Tropical Inn), Hasthun (Katuwapituliya), Naufer, etc., are directly connected with the attack. All of them have been identified as ISIS extremists. Not only them but their kith and kin also. It further says the Thowheed (Wahabism) ideology is the foundation upon which Islamic extremists operate. There is no mention about a political conspiracy. Anyone who has studied terrorism knows that the foundational ideology of ISIS and Al Qaeda is Wahabism and the Muslim Brotherhood. So the Janak De Silva Commission has also concluded it was an ISIS attack.
Yusuf says 7 years on, the failure to assemble the full picture of the Easter attack is not only an investigative lapse but also a profound indictment of the Sri Lankan state. I think it’s a malicious statement made to keep on misleading the victims in particular and the public at large. The full picture has already been assembled (how Zaharan embraced ISIS ideology, trained, rehearsed and attacked), and the local and foreign investigations are complete, and culprits are in jail pending trial, and high courts in 9 districts are hearing the cases. So how can Yusuf say that there is an investigative gap? Tell us where?
If Yusuf or anyone else knows about fresh evidence, they are welcome to submit it.
Earlier also Yusuf tried to create doubt about Sara Jasmin (whether she was alive or dead) but did not respond after I cleared it too.
Without any concrete/substantive evidence, if Yusuf tries to belittle the investigations already carried out and imply that there are huge lapses, it’s an effort to divert the attention from ISIS extremism to someone else in the dark.
It has a highly detrimental effect on our national security. If Yusuf continues to write “in the national interest”, he should be more careful when he writes on matters concerning “national security”.
- Rear Admiral (Dr) Sarath Weerasekera VSV, RWP, former minister of Public Security
| Response to Mr Weerasekera Mr Sarath Weerasekera’s response to my comments published on May 3, 2026, clearly reveals that he is not convinced by the arguments put forward by me that the mastermind who planned and executed the dastardly attacks on Easter Sunday go beyond Zahran and Nauffer Moulavi. Neither do I agree with his interpretation of the events that led to the said attacks. In the circumstances it is best to agree to disagree and discuss it again in the future if and when the opportunity arises. (javidyusuf@yahoo.com) | |