As Sri Lanka celebrates its 78th Independence Day, renewed attention is being drawn to a long-overlooked chapter of the island’s anti-colonial struggle: the role of Muslim patriots who fought against foreign invaders but were branded as traitors during the colonial era and remain unrecognized to this day. While independence commemorations highlight unity and sacrifice, critics argue that the national narrative still excludes key contributors who resisted imperial domination alongside their Sinhala and Tamil counterparts.
Among those cited are Segu Didi, Peer Muhammad Maulavi, and Salam Udayar, who led resistance efforts mainly in Trincomalee; Meera Hussain Kariyapper, Hussain Lebbe, and Uduma Lebbe, who fought in Batticaloa; and Abubakkar Isa and Anis Lebbe, who were active in Ampara. These figures, historians say, played decisive roles in local resistance against colonial forces but were labeled traitors by imperial authorities seeking to suppress rebellion and deter collective resistance.
A historical parallel is often drawn with the Sinhala leaders of the Uva Wellassa rebellion, who were similarly branded as traitors by the British. In a landmark move decades later, those figures were officially recognized as national heroes through a gazette notification issued during the presidency of Maithripala Sirisena. While that act was widely welcomed as a correction of historical injustice, critics point out that Muslim resistance leaders were conspicuously absent from the list, despite having faced the same colonial persecution.
The failure to recognize these Muslim patriots has also been attributed to political weakness within successive governments. Observers argue that Muslim political leaders, including those who held office at the time of the gazette, did not assertively advocate for the recognition of their own historical figures. This absence of political will, they say, reflects a broader pattern in which the protection of Muslim heritage, property, and religious institutions has often taken a back seat to short-term political calculations.
Sri Lanka’s loss of sovereignty itself is frequently traced to internal divisions that predated colonial conquest. The Portuguese and Dutch were able to entrench themselves by exploiting rivalries among local kings, aligning with some rulers to defeat others. The British later capitalized on these fractures to bring the entire island under their control, embedding imperial ideology into political, religious, and civil life across Sinhala, Tamil, and Muslim communities.
In response, resistance emerged not only through armed struggle but also through intellectual, religious, and civic organization. Within the Muslim community, religious and civil leaders such as Siddhi Lebbe, Wappichi Marikkar, Orabi Pasha, Mapillai Lebbe Alim, Abdullah bin Al Badib Al Yemeni, I.L.M. Abdul Aziz, and others mobilized communities to defend cultural and religious identity against forced assimilation. Their efforts were complemented by political leaders including Dr. T. B. Jaya, Sir Razik Farid, Dr. Badiuddin Mahmud, Sir Makan Makar, A. M. A. Aziz, and M.C.M. Khalil, who worked within and beyond colonial structures to secure rights and representation.
Equally significant was the role of Muslim journalists and intellectuals who sparked what has been described as a “written thought revolution.” Publications such as Muslim Nesan, Gnan Deepam, Muslim Padukavalan, Islam Mitthiraan, and Sri Lanka Puri disseminated religious, cultural, and geopolitical awareness, connecting local struggles to global currents. These newspapers, historians note, were instrumental in shaping political consciousness and resisting imperial narratives.
Critics contrast this legacy with what they see as a decline in principled leadership today. While past leaders made personal sacrifices to protect community rights, many contemporary political figures are accused of exploiting historical struggles for personal gain. The institutions built by earlier religious leaders, including mosques, madrasas, and schools, were rooted in faith and education rather than alignment with imperial geopolitical interests. Some scholars emphasize that these leaders drew inspiration from broader Islamic solidarity, including the Ottoman world, rather than from collaboration with colonial powers.
Concerns are also raised about the present fragmentation of Sri Lankan society. The unity that once cut across ethnic and religious lines in the fight for independence has, critics argue, given way to political division and identity-based polarization. Within the Muslim community, internal religious and political divisions have been blamed for weakening collective resilience, with some commentators linking this fragmentation to the emergence of extremist violence during the era of good governance.
