by Shazly Ahamed
The release of two bombshell reports on the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks has finally drawn back the curtain on a circus of conspiracy theories, incompetence, and the dark art of political deflection that has misled Sri Lanka for years. The aftermath of this tragedy should have united the country in mourning and determination to prevent similar acts of terror; instead, it unleashed a parade of outlandish claims worthy of a thriller novel.
The attacks, which killed hundreds and scarred the nation, were initially blamed on everyone from local intelligence agencies and top military officers to India’s RAW and even the Israeli government. The absurdity of these accusations would be laughable if it hadn’t distracted from the real threat and led the public down a rabbit hole of misinformation. It is now clear, thanks to these reports, that while the nation was kept busy debating conspiracy theories, the true perpetrators – Salafi-Wahhabi extremists – slipped through the cracks.
But it doesn’t end there. The reports reveal something even more troubling than the feverish accusations themselves: the dangerous incompetence festering within Sri Lanka’s security apparatus. With damning evidence of high-ranking officials neglecting leads, ignoring crucial intelligence, and, shockingly, rising to key national security positions through political allegiance rather than merit, the reports bring home an unsettling reality. The very people tasked with ensuring Sri Lanka’s safety were asleep at the wheel – or worse, too busy safeguarding their careers to protect the nation.
In a rare move, Udaya Gammanpila brought these reports to the public eye, bypassing the current government’s apparent desire to keep them under wraps. His release has exposed an inconvenient truth for the ruling JVP/NPP, a government previously eager to capitalise on these baseless theories. In setting the record straight, these reports have cut through the conspiracy fog to reveal what Sri Lanka should truly be worried about: entrenched negligence and a fractured security infrastructure in desperate need of overhaul.
The first report, unveiled on October 21 and led by retired High Court Judge A.N.J. de Alwis, does more than shed light – it shines a glaring spotlight on the gross failures of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) before and after the Vavunathivu killings in November 2018. Here was a brutal murder of two policemen on November 30, but rather than recognise it as the warning it was, the CID waved it off as the work of the defunct LTTE, a group that had been out of commission for nearly a decade at this point.
The evidence practically shouted that something far more sinister was at play, yet CID leadership – SDIG Ravi Seneviratne and SSP Shani Abeysekara – clung to their outdated LTTE narrative like a security blanket. In doing so, these officials not only missed the real threat of Islamist extremism brewing in the country but set the stage for much larger failures down the road. Seneviratne, the former Senior DIG, and Abeysekara, CID Director, did not just drop the ball; they turned a blind eye to it entirely.
This LTTE line of reasoning clung to life for nearly four months, during which crucial leads were ignored, and potential warning signs missed entirely. The report is scathing in its critique of the CID, pointing out their complete failure to identify the real perpetrators – Islamist extremists connected to Zahran Hashim and his extremist group, the National Thowheed Jamaat (NTJ), both instrumental in planning the Easter attacks. This was no simple oversight; this was a gross lapse in judgment. By failing to investigate adequately, the CID practically handed these extremists a free pass, leaving them largely unmonitored and free to orchestrate a plot that would soon devastate the nation. The report doesn’t mince words, stating, “The Committee observed that the CID had failed to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the incident.” It goes further, demanding that both Seneviratne and Abeysekara be prosecuted for their gross negligence, categorising their behaviour as criminally negligent—a damning assessment that points to more than just incompetence; it points to a betrayal of duty.
Adding insult to injury, the report unveils that Seneviratne knew about Zahran Hashim and the threat posed by NTJ affiliates yet failed to act to prevent the Easter attacks. This wasn’t a mere lapse; it was a dereliction of duty with disastrous consequences. And yet, in a staggering show of political favouritism, the current administration has elevated Seneviratne to the role of Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security – one of the highest national security posts in Sri Lanka. As if that weren’t enough, Shani Abeysekara, similarly tainted by this negligence, now heads the Central Criminal Intelligence Analysis Bureau. Both of these appointments, rather than being based on competence, seem fuelled by party loyalty, a practice that chips away at the country’s national security structure. By filling critical roles with individuals whose records are marred by inaction and negligence, the government doesn’t just jeopardise public safety – it sends a message that loyalty trumps ability, eroding public trust in the very institutions meant to keep them safe.
The second report, released on October 28 under the leadership of retired Justice S. I. Imam, takes aim at the flimsy allegations against General Suresh Sallay, former head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI). These accusations originated from Azad Maulana, a former coordinating secretary to politician Pillayan, which were amplified by Channel 4, a UK media outlet known for its anti-Sri Lankan government slant. Although Maulana is a nobody, Channel 4 took him in and broadcasted a complete drama revolving around his claims. Channel 4’s report – built on Maulana’s uncorroborated claims – accused Sallay of conspiring with Zahran Hashim in 2018 to plan the Easter attacks. According to Maulana, this supposed meeting took place on a coconut plantation in Vananthawilluwa, where Sallay and Zahran allegedly schemed to carry out the attacks.
But in a twist that throws Maulana’s entire tale into question, the Imam report disassembles these claims with ease, revealing that Sallay was, in fact, nowhere near Sri Lanka at the time. He was in India, focused on academic pursuits – a fact so unassailable that the report states, “Sallay’s alibi is an irreversible fact. There is no evidence at all to show any involvement on the part of Sallay with Zahran or the members of the National Tawheed Jamaat whose mission in life is death during the aforesaid period and thereafter.” This revelation exposes not only the baselessness of Maulana’s claims but also raises questions about Channel 4’s willingness to air such a story with so little verification.
This detail alone shreds the narrative, yet the Imam report goes further. Not only was Sallay indisputably out of the country at the time, but the alleged meeting spot in Vananthawilluwa – a house on a coconut plantation – didn’t even exist then. The holes in Maulana’s story are wide enough to sail a ship through. The inconsistencies in Maulana’s story are in fact laughable due to its poor structure. Yet, Channel 4 had used his cooked-up tale to spew disinformation in the Sri Lankan social space. The outlet eagerly amplified Maulana’s unverified claims, later admitting in Switzerland that they had nothing beyond Maulana’s word. Such a casual disregard for verification raises serious ethical questions about their reporting standards.
This incident is more than just a case of poor journalism; it’s a powerful example of how baseless conspiracy theories, once dressed up by major media outlets, can erode public trust in essential security institutions. When unsubstantiated claims gain traction, they do more than misinform—they sow division, fuel cynicism, and cast shadows on those responsible for protecting the nation.
These two reports not only dismantle these conspiracy theories but also underline the lasting damage caused by such narratives. In the aftermath of the attacks, numerous theories emerged to explain the motivations and identities of the perpetrators, each more far-fetched than the last. Among the most prominent were claims that the attacks were orchestrated by Sri Lankan intelligence agencies, high-ranking military officers, and even foreign governments such as India and Israel. These theories, completely baseless, misdirected public attention away from the genuine threat posed by extremist elements within the country. Worse still, they allowed some political actors to exploit the tragedy for their own gain, casting suspicion on intelligence agencies, military personnel, and external entities to divert from the reality that local Islamist extremist groups were behind the attacks.
The JVP/NPP, now in power, has faced criticism for allowing such conspiracy theories to proliferate, as these theories align with narratives promoted by elements within their political circles. Gammanpila has argued that the current government’s reluctance to release these reports was an attempt to protect this false narrative from public scrutiny, as the facts laid bare in the reports run contrary to claims previously promoted by figures within the JVP/NPP. The propagation of these false narratives has significantly damaged public trust in the institutions tasked with protecting the nation, further eroding confidence in the government’s commitment to national security.
The spread of misinformation has also had serious implications for Sri Lanka’s efforts to combat extremism. By shifting the blame away from actual extremist groups, conspiracy theories have hindered the nation’s ability to address the ideological and structural factors that contribute to radicalisation. Instead of uniting the country in a collective effort to root out extremism, these theories have sown division, making it more difficult for security agencies to garner the public support and cooperation necessary to prevent future attacks. This situation has been exacerbated by the presence of unqualified individuals in high-ranking security positions, appointed not for their expertise but for their political affiliations. By promoting officials like Seneviratne and Abeysekara, whose records reveal serious lapses in judgment, the government has endangered the security apparatus and jeopardised its ability to respond effectively to threats. The recommendations of the report shine glaringly at the new appointments. “SDIG-CID Ravi Seneviratne and Director, CID SSP Shani Abeysekera should be prosecuted by the relevant authority under the relevant provisions of the Penal code for their negligence in conducting investigations”
The decision to release these reports is a step toward rectifying the damaging effects of these conspiracy theories, but it also highlights the considerable work still needed to rebuild public trust and strengthen national security. Sri Lanka faces a critical juncture in its fight against extremism and misinformation, one that requires transparency, accountability, and a clear acknowledgment of past mistakes. These reports provide a framework for moving forward, urging the government to place qualified, competent individuals in key security positions and to actively counter false narratives that distort public understanding of security issues.
The consequences of ignoring these recommendations could be severe. The appointment of individuals who have proven negligent in their duties to critical national security roles not only increases the risk of further attacks but also signals a disregard for the sacrifices made by the victims of the Easter Sunday tragedy. In order to honour their memory and ensure a safer future, it is essential that Sri Lanka’s leaders take a firm stance against misinformation and prioritise the appointment of capable, trustworthy officials in its security institutions.
The current government, along with pro-JVP elements, appears intent on sweeping these damning reports under the rug, hoping to obscure the troubling findings that challenge their narratives. In an ironic twist, these same pro-JVP factions were quick to elevate Shani Abeysekara to hero status, celebrating him as a master cop. Influential YouTubers like Tharindu Jayawardhana and SL Vlogs went so far as to portray Shani as a saint, lionising him in stories and interviews that painted an uncritical picture of his actions. However, the recent revelations have exposed the truth about Shani’s negligence and incompetence, causing those who once celebrated him to cower in embarrassment. The reports have stripped away the veneer of heroism, revealing a far more complex and troubling reality that challenges the glorified image they sought to promote.
Then we have the issue of the Cardinal. The dissemination of conspiracy theories by Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith poses a significant obstacle to delivering justice for the victims of the Easter attacks. While the Cardinal’s vocal criticisms and allegations might resonate with some, they often overshadow the pressing need for a thorough investigation based on facts rather than speculation. It appears that, in his fervour to challenge governments he does not like and push a political agenda, the Cardinal may be prioritising political objectives over the spiritual and communal healing required by his flock. This approach not only complicates the quest for accountability but also risks alienating those who seek solace and resolution in the wake of such a tragic event. By focusing on unfounded narratives rather than strengthening communal harmony, the Cardinal undermines the pursuit of justice, leaving victims and their families to grapple with the consequences of both the attacks and the ensuing misinformation.
The release of the reports serves as a much-needed corrective to the conspiracy theories that have clouded the true story of the Easter Sunday attacks. It reveals the importance of an informed public, one that understands the real security threats facing the nation and can discern fact from fiction. By exposing the failures of the CID and dispelling the baseless allegations against General Sallay, these reports not only vindicate individuals wrongfully accused but also underscore the necessity of competent leadership in safeguarding national security. Sri Lanka’s future stability depends on its ability to confront these challenges head-on, without the distractions of misinformation or the influence of political favoritism. Only through a commitment to transparency, accountability, and the truth can the country hope to prevent such tragedies from occurring again.
Shazly Ahamed is a concerned citizen from the Eastern Province
