Sri Lankans never miss a day without a saga of ambitious politicians trying to gain power and attention through dubious means. Often, these politicians exploit sensitive crimes that have left people grieving for justice for years, twisting narratives and conspiracy theories to create divisions among the public. This is especially prevalent in this part of the world, where racism and religious extremism are used to establish power through fear.
However, pragmatic socio-cultural changes have occurred in the country’s political landscape over the past few years, rendering this kind of cheap political circus ineffective. The general public has become less manipulable, and those involved in such tactics are likely to be ousted in the upcoming general election.
The latest media spectacle involves a report from an investigative committee regarding the Easter Sunday attack. Pivithuru Hela Urumaya (PHU) leader and former MP Udaya Gammanpila said that former Senior DIG Ravi Seneviratne, named as a main accused in the committee’s report, should be immediately removed from his position as Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security.
From the outset, it was clear that Gammanpila’s main intention was to target and discredit the dedicated police officers Shani Abeysekara and Ravi Seneviratne, both of whom have established strong reputations within the CID. Shani Abeysekara is known for investigating several high-profile criminal cases in the country, including the Easter Sunday attack, the murder of ruggerite, Wasim Thajudeen, the abduction and disappearance of 11 youth, the murder of Bharatha Lakshman Premaratne and the murder of journalist Lasantha Wickramatunge among others. Similarly, former DIG Ravi Seneviratne has played an important role in investigating many significant crimes, particularly during the peak of the civil war.
Both officers are respected for their commitment and loyalty to their work, free from manipulation by politicians and other powerful forces. It is evident that during the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime, these two officers faced numerous challenges due to the straightforward nature of their investigations. They were transferred, suspended and even jailed. This situation continued during the Yahapalana regime and worsened during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s time in power.
These two officers supported the National People’s Force at the last Presidential election with the hope of continuing the investigations they had conducted and seeking justice for the victims. A few days later, as they extended their support to the NPP presidential candidate, former President Ranil Wickremesinghe appointed a committee chaired by retired High Court Judge A.N.J. De Alwis. On September 18, 2024, just a few days before the Presidential election, the committee submitted its report.
Former MP Gammanpila, who claimed to have received this report by post, began challenging the Government to remove former Senior DIG Ravi Seneviratne from his position as Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security as Seneviratne was named one of the main accused in the investigative committee report.
Throughout the history of the country, it is common to see Presidents appoint commissions of inquiry to investigate controversial incidents promptly. However, the effectiveness of these investigation commissions in Sri Lanka is questionable.
Some people argue that these Commissions are established primarily to placate the public and downplay the issues at hand. There are accusations that the information revealed through such Commissions complicates legal processes and that these efforts are mere attempts to waste time and public funds.
We reject the committee’s report and are currently pursuing legal action in this regard – Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security and former DIG Ravi Seneviratne
Amidst this situation, the Sunday Observer spoke to Ravi Seneviratne, the Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security and former DIG, to understand his stance on the accusations levelled against him.
Seneviratne said, “The first three-member committee to investigate the Easter Sunday attack was appointed by former President Maithripala Sirisena and was headed by Supreme Court Judge Vijitha Malalgoda. Then-Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe appointed a Parliamentary Select Committee. There are sixteen or seventeen Fundamental Rights applications related to the Easter attacks filed in the Supreme Court. In each of those reports, the individuals responsible for the attack were identified.
None of those committee reports, Supreme Court orders, or the actions of Shani Abeysekera or myself contained any errors regarding the Easter attack. Undersuch circumstances, the initial question to investigate is whether the committee appointed by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, just a few weeks before the last Presidential election, undermined the Judiciary.
This Committee was formed after Shani Abeysekera and I joined the NPP’s political platform. The committee report was completed with great anticipation on September 18, which clearly reveals the political motive behind it. Therefore, we reject the committee’s report and are pursuing legal action in this regard,” he said.
The intention behind the Alwis Report is to obstruct the possibility of reopening investigations – Journalist Sunanda Deshapriya
We also spoke to journalist Sunanda Deshapriya, who recently launched an investigative book on the Easter Sunday attack and he shared his insights on the matter. He said, “Previously, there have been several formal investigations regarding this Easter attack.
The Parliamentary Select Committee and the Janak Silva Commission conducted investigations that involved witnesses, lawyers and the media. Those two Commission reports were completed following acceptable methods for any investigation.
In contrast, when examining the Alwis Committee report, it seems that what was done there is limited to investigating currently available evidence. It is questionable whether the accused were called during the investigation and whether lawyers participated. This report is essentially a solitary document produced by only three individuals.
The two earlier reports presented clear facts and neither Shani Abeysekera nor Ravi Seneviratne were accused in those reports. The responsibility of the CID is not to prevent crime but to conduct investigations and reach conclusions.
Prevention falls under the purview of the intelligence agencies and the police. This report appears to be an attempt to discredit these two officers, which is something that should not have happened. The report allegedly given to Gammanpila by stakeholders of the previous Government lacks evidence to substantiate that it was received via mail,”
Deshapriya said that one crucial point highlighted in his book is that the investigations related to the Easter Sunday attack, conducted by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), came to an end once Gotabaya Rajapaksa assumed power. “However, the CID was not even allowed to question individuals. In my opinion, the intention behind the Alwis Report is to obstruct the possibility of reopening the investigations,” he added.
Deshapriya said the significant difference between a committee report and a Presidential Commission report. A Presidential Commission report can submit recommendations and has jurisdiction, while committee reports cannot make such recommendations or invoke legal action. “The very appointment of this committee is flawed, especially considering that the essential recommendations of the Presidential Commission reports—compiled with the participation of over 400 witnesses—were to be implemented. The parliamentary committee report clearly stated that recommendations were made to investigate whether the Easter attack was orchestrated to gain an advantage in the Presidential elections,” he said.
Deshapriya said that it is evident that this committee was appointed for narrow political gain, particularly to intimidate Shani Abeysekera and Ravi Seneviratne and to remove them from the investigations. However, Deshapriya said, “These media sagas will not hinder the investigation into the Easter attack under this Government.”
The Government is not willing to remove Ravi Seneviratne and Shani Abeysekera from their current positions under any circumstances – Minister Vijitha Herath
In response to the accusations made by former MP Gammanpila, Cabinet Media Spokesman Minister Vijitha Herath stated that the Government is not willing to remove Ravi Seneviratne and Shani Abeysekera from their current positions under any circumstances. He said that former MP Udaya Gammanpila cited a report from the Committee regarding Easter attacks, claiming that these two officers were targeted due to a motive to remove them from their roles.
The Minister said, “Even the victims of the Easter attacks are aware of the impartiality of the two officers,” adding that he further mentioned, “there is a clear intention to remove them for the benefit of persons with various interests, which will not be tolerated by the Government. We will continue the Easter Sunday attack investigations in the right manner and ensure justice for the victims. That is the promise this Government has given.”
